A RETIRED couple who spent hundreds of pounds on flowers and planters to brighten up a patch of grass outside their home have been ordered to remove it.

Patricia Wilson and Philip Alexander said they were fed up with the weed-ridden patch of communal grass under their front window in Princess Drive, off Boroughbridge Road, and decided to add a splash of colour.

But residents of the flats received a letter from property management company Trinity, which is responsible for maintaining the grass, reminding residents that the cost of repairing “wilful damage” to property would be passed on to tenants.

Mr Alexander, 67, said: “I got up one morning and I opened the curtains and I thought enough’s enough; it was just depressing. So I moved the tubs from the back where it wasn’t light and I put shingle down.”

He said: “As far as we were concerned their (Trinity’s) responsibility was to cut three small areas of grass. They spray the weeds, but it’s not really effective.”

Mr Alexander claims the grass had been “in a state for a long time” and was full of dandelions and “every other weed you could imagine”.

He also said he came to a verbal agreement two years ago with Trinity, when he obtained permission to alter the grassed area but would still have to pay garden maintenance fees.

Despite the letter telling him to return the area to its original state, Mr Alexander said he intends to leave the garden as it is.

“I will not be happy for it to be returned to scrubland,” he said.

A spokesman for Trinity said all leaseholders contribute to garden maintenance and that the site is visited 21 times a year and that the lawns are treated regularly with “weed and feed.”

He also said there was no record of permission been granted for Mr Alexander to change the lawn.

He said: “The area of landscape in question belongs to the freeholder and is available for the use of all residents. This relates to all leaseholders not just the three properties that are closest.

“It is not permissible in accordance with the lease to alter any areas of the development without permission from the freeholder.”