Sir.-Further to the Taylor household's letter, "Unhappy over trees issue", in last week's Gazette, we have experienced similar problems with the council.

Trees on Great Binfields Road loomed large over our back garden, causing severe loss of natural light to the rear of our property, with leaves and sap covering our garden plants and a lack of sunlight causing severe bare patches on our rear lawn.

We contacted the trees maintenance section of the council and were told unless there was an element of public danger, nothing could be done. We would have to live with the problem and engage a tree surgeon.

Reluctantly, we employed a professional at a cost of £150 to remove the offending branches and cut back the trees as much as possible.

No doubt it's nice business for tree surgeons in the area, but surely it's a responsibility of the council?

I also wish to mention that a plot of thorns and scrubland lies adjacent to our property.

It is owned by no one, and branches and dangerous thorns often protrude onto a public path and onto another part of our garden.

We have regularly maintained this particular plot over the last 12 years and trimmed and cut it back.

We do this because our neighbours and members of the public knock on our door to point out the hazards posed by these thorns.

-M Curtis, Little Fallow, Lychpit, Basingstoke.

Sir.-The Taylor household might well ask why the council is defaulting on its more mundane responsibilities.

This council seems happy to present councillors with expensive laptop computers. It seems it would also rather build a hideously expensive bridge between Festival Place and the "prestigious and luxurious Crown Heights" (the developer's description, not mine.) I have yet to see anyone using it.

Finally, the council is holding its financial breath over the burgeoning black hole in the local authority's superannuated final salary pension scheme. According to a report by the county treasurer earlier this year, the deficit in this pension scheme is expected to be £907million by the end of this year. Uncertainty exists as to where the money to fill this hole is going to come from.

There is a considerable threat to the long-suffering council tax payer.

This cost must not and cannot be borne by the taxpayer, whose own pension benefits have been eroded (in the real world) over the years. No one will bale out the taxpayer.

So where does all this leave the Taylor household and the rest of the council taxpayers who want to live in neat and tidy surroundings?

It seems the only uncertain source of cash to pay for cutting the grass and trimming the trees in summer, and gritting and salting our roads in winter (remember the total misery and gridlock last January 28), could come from the sums of money that the council manages to wring out of developers, despite many of the developments actually being hugely contrary to local opinion.

-Brian Sperring, Chineham.

Sir.-Having walked up a local road, Guttridge Lane, on Saturday, August 21, I came across brambles, stinging nettles, and overgrown shrubs.

These stretched out across in front of me, leaving only about 50 per cent of pavement to walk on.

With the roadworks in Tadley this road has become busy.

With the shrubs causing a narrower footpath, I am concerned that any children or older people using this path could be in danger of an accident.

I wonder what we pay taxes for?

At this time of year the shrubs and grass grow very quickly. Surely the council could cut back the greenery on roadsides that covers footpaths, road signs, and obscures views on roundabouts, again increasing the risk of accidents?

So come on, Basingstoke council, get your act together and supply the paying public with these necessary actions.

-Steve Ballard, Droxford Crescent, Tadley.