OPINION: Letters to the editor of the Newbury Weekly News
How much of council tax will go on pitch?
It appears our fiscally incompetent council, which complains it has no money, is now set to borrow another £1.25m to pay for an all-weather plastic pitch for Faraday Road (Newbury Weekly News, October 2) in order to justify an election promise.
Why didn’t they do this a couple of years ago and opt for an all-weather pitch right from the start?
There was a live planning application in force at the time, which the council allowed to lapse, which means more expense applying for a new permission.
All the work getting the existing pitch suitable for matches (cost around £700,000) is now in part wasted.
There is no clubhouse in these plans either, so they are going to look pretty stupid if an application for a clubhouse were to fail.
Let’s look at the finance.
The council wants to run the pitch itself.
Maybe this is because someone told them they could make £170,000 per annum.
Personally I doubt that in the early years but anyway a fixed loan of £1.25m at a very generous interest rate of four per cent on an interest only basis equates to £50,000pa, which over the lifespan of the playing surface (10 years) equates to half a million with no paying off of the loan meaning they will still owe £1.25m and now have to borrow for a new surface.
If the money was borrowed on a repayment basis over 10 years at four per cent the repayments would be just over £12,650 per month
In addition to the borrowing costs, there are also the maintenance costs associated with keeping the microparticles from wear getting into the Kennet.
This means I find the headline ‘All-weather surface could bring in annual revenue of £170,000’ misleading.
The word “could” means there is no certainty and the council could equally lose money on the venture, which means the taxpayer is taking the financial risk.
In addition, the way it is written implies this is a net figure and not a gross figure.
It appears the Lib Dems have borrowed substantially over the last couple of years, and we are left paying the interest.
It would be interesting to see how much of one’s council tax goes to paying interest on loans that are not being paid off.
John Gotelee
London Road, Newbury
The cost of caring for dogs is excessive
There are so many pets being abandoned and left to fend for themselves.
I am now not in a position to afford either veterinary fees or pet insurance for my two elderly dogs.
One is 13 years old and the other almost 12 years old.
I am currently struggling with my younger dog who needs an operation I cannot afford.
It breaks my heart to see him suffer.
I feel I have no choice than to either beg for financial help or have him put to sleep, which is also very expensive.
The vets will not allow me to pay monthly, even though I have been with the same veterinary practice since the early 1980s, and I could no longer afford insurance so therefore have no medical cover for them either, so what do I do?
I can totally understand why people abandon their pets, it must be a very heart-breaking decision to abandon or give up their pet.
Some people can’t even get them to a place where they could be rehomed as they can’t afford to even make the journey.
I have set up a GoFundMe page for my dog to get the surgery he needs.
But what happens when one of them needs surgery again?
How do I beg for help again?
The insurance company I was with told me ‘pets are a luxury’ and maybe I shouldn’t have had a dog if I couldn’t afford one.
Well, 13 years ago when I first had my dog my finances were healthier.
How did I know that in 13 years time I would not be able to afford the £4,500-a-year insurance they wanted me to purchase.
That’s just for one dog… not both.
The insurance started at £15.20 a month, they now want £351 a month.
I live alone, I only have 28 hours contracted therefore not much money coming into my home.
I struggle financially. I am not entitled to benefits as I own my own home.
I really am stuck and worry all the time about my two best friends, my furry babies, the loves of my life right now.
Surely the vets can’t do this?
They can’t deny treatment or payment plans... can they?
Debbie Huntley
Thatcham
‘Hung out to dry’ over car parking ticket
I have a great deal of sympathy with your correspondent this week (‘My £100 fine for six minutes in car park’, Newbury Weekly News, October 2).
I have had an issue with the same car park, but it is rather more complex as it involves the advertising of a special ‘overnight’ rate and failing to programme the pay machines to allow for it, probably for about three months from early April to early August this year.
My understanding is that this was a breach of fair trading laws and that the company would not be entitled to recover any ‘debts’ that might arise as a result.
I complained via Citizens Advice to Trading Standards at the end of July, but heard nothing further.
However the machines appear to have been reprogrammed fairly soon afterwards and now ask users if they wish to pay at the standard or the night rate, even during the day when the night rate isn’t available.
The company has nonetheless continued to pursue me for two penalty charges and I am having difficulty in avoiding drawing the conclusion that the council’s Trading Standards service has ‘hung me out to dry’.
My evidence to the appeal process amounted to a video demonstrating that the overnight rate could not be obtained whatever buttons were pressed on the machines.
However, I have been thwarted by a defect in that process because the car park operator and the ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution’ organisation have refused to consider it and I have been left with the option of sacrificing my principles and writing off £200 or defending any action by the company in the small claims court, which does accommodate relevant video evidence.
The company’s response did nothing to dispel my impression that many private parking operators employ bullying tactics to get motorists to pay their penalty charges rather than contest them, and that the industry as a whole deserves being labelled as a ‘pariah’ one.
While it is not key to my particular case, I do also wonder whether the signage at the car park “Duration of stay calculated from point of entry to point of exit” might be imposing a term that is unfair in consumer trading law, thereby making all penalty notices unenforceable.
Whether or not the company allows a ‘consideration period’ under its trade association code of practice, the signage is implying that users must pay for any time spent reading the terms and conditions.
Graham Smith
Shaw Road, Newbury
Let’s not forget that we are cause of the smell
We are blaming Thames Water for the unpleasant smell of sewage, completely forgetting that it is our smell.
Every single one of us contributes daily.
We flush it away, forget about it, and expect someone else to deal with it.
We do need a better way of dealing with it, but until someone can think of one we should be thankful that Thames Water do their best.
Stella Nesbit
Orchard Close, Woolhampton
