AS an avid reader of your Letters page for numerous years, I find myself agreeing with Brian Derbyshire (for once!) (Wed, April 9), in reference to the issue of CCTV cameras at Hall i'th Wood.

I have relatives who live on the estate, and have done for some 40-plus years. They were notified that CCTV was going to be installed on the estate, but the issue of payment was never mentioned due to the grant funding by the Government.

"Hard-Pressed Taxpayer" thinks the tenants should pay for the cameras themselves -- why?

The council installed the CCTV cameras with grant money which has now, allegedly, dried up. Or was it the plan all along to get the residents to pay for the scheme?

If the council came along and installed CCTV into a privately-owned residential street and then sent all the residents a bill, there would be uproar. No one would pay.

The council has taken this upon itself to install the cameras, and should pay the consequences.

Some of the residents have installed their own CCTV, with their own money -- do they still have to pay for the council-installed ones?

Also, there are quite a few residents on the estate who own their own properties and will pay council tax and not rent. Will they be invoiced separately?

The whole situation is a joke. Perhaps if the council used the funding it has wasted on installing speed ramps all around the estate, its maths might have added up to a better figure.

Disgusted

Former Resident of Hall i'th' Wood