So the council has described the situation of having to dig up Tadcaster Road again just a few months after resurfacing it as ‘not ideal’ (Blunder will see Tadcaster Road dug up - months after £600k resurfacing, October 10).

They really do like to understate things, don’t they? A complete farce would be more appropriate.

Here’s a tip for the council: the next time you have £600,000 to spend on the roads, use the money to offer early retirement to the officer responsible for this alleged ‘miscommunication’, it would be less of a waste. Assuming this wasn’t an intentional mistake so the council had an excuse to ram through even more anti car policies due to the disruption.

How about in future you dig the road up, let the utility firms do their work and then resurface it, all in one job?

Dr Scott Marmion, Woodthorpe, York

Is this council fit for purpose?

We all are doing our best to prevent waste. So the question must be asked ‘is our council fit for purpose’?

It defies logic that Tadcaster Road, recently resurfaced to the tune of £600,000, is now to be dug up again. Then, to make matters worse, the council excuses itself by saying that it has been a case of ‘miscommunication’. More like ‘gross mismanagement’.

Where was the council’s deputy leader and head of transport Cllr. Andy D’Agorne when all this was happening? No doubt preoccupied with one of his ‘green’ schemes to rid York of vehicles?

In terms of planned maintenance, surely there is a managerial system in place to check with all the utility companies what work they have planned over the next two to three years, then to hold back on any major resurfacing work if there is anything forthcoming? If the council had done this then it would later have learned that the Government funding of £5 million had been passed.

The next time such a waste of money is identified, maybe the council should pay it back.

John Aked, Skelton, York