IN their response (Excellent value, readers' letters, May 17) to my references to Hartrigg Oaks, Janet and Tony Dale seem to be under the impression I begrudge their good fortune in being able to afford the lifestyle they enjoy at Hartrigg Oaks. This is far from the truth, as they, like most, if not all of their fellow residents, have had the foresight and fortunate circumstances to enable them to afford a comfortable and happy retirement.

This I applaud, as my husband and I also managed to achieve an independent lifestyle, albeit to a lesser degree, now being on a limited income supported by the little provision put aside for our retirement. We are all fortunate in not having to rely on housing benefit etc.

Janet and Tony Dale overlooked the basic and more important reason I wrote, in that I was uncertain (and remain so) about the idea that villages based on the concept of Hartrigg Oaks would ease the pressure on health budgets, because of the costs involved and also the reason given in the penultimate paragraph of my letter (Service charge, May 12).

Certainly the Government could not afford or justify the cost of subsidising this scale of facilities and amenities.

I am fully aware of the factors leading to inflation, as we have been residents of Dower Court for twenty years. We could not fail to notice and feel the effects of inflation when we received the annual service charge report from the Joseph Rowntree Housing Trust.

I note the reason given for JRHT limiting annual fee increases.

However, in the case of Dower Court, and possibly other JRHT developments, the Government has, for a number of years, "capped" the annual service charge and rent increases by an agreed formula.

Elizabeth C Earle,

Dower Court,

William Plows Avenue, York.

Updated: 09:31 Thursday, May 25, 2006