ONE cannot be but sympathetic to the plight of the woman who recently wrote in The Citizen (August 16) of the unfairness of our Labour council in subjecting her to pressure and withholding from her her rightful level of entitlement to assistance with her rent.

While at the same time writing off -- and quite outside the law --vast sums of uncollected rent from council homes.

Those who "can pay but won't pay" come off best all the time, don't they. The circumstances of the claimant, as described in The Citizen, make it obvious to the town hall housing benefit department that she is entitled to consideration for both the higher levels as specified in statute law and case law respectively.

She should claim both of these immediately -- with backpay! If she still finds the council to be indifferent to her plight and blocking her, she should contact any Opposition councillor who, if he/she are worth their salt, will very firmly put in their place our town hall Labour bully-boys.

Ah, but perhaps I'm being too hard on our ruling councillors. They have after all been very, very busy of late, haven't they.

Behind closed doors and far away from public eyes they've been setting the level of our chief executive's retirement deal. So, how much is his leaving going to cost the taxpayer? Well, £250,000 is the latest figure.

If only they would put as much effort into ensuring the sick and the elderly got their rightful entitlement instead of putting obstacles in the way! To the wealthy shall be given more, to the needy...

Peter Roscoe, Bond Street,

South Shore.