Robert Midwynter, of Nelson Road, Dartmouth, writes: Mandate? What mandate? The Dartmouth Business Improvement District represents only 16 per cent of those of the occupiers who will be forced to pay its 'tax'. So long as others can legally put their hands in my pocket, for their own advantage and to my detriment, I prefer that they keep their self-serving claims about their legal mandate to themselves. While the BID does have a 'legal' mandate, it certainly doesn't hold a moral or just mandate. Any mandate claimed by the BID is misleading. We are all well aware that were the BID process to be started again now it would be rejected by an overwhelming majority. I and many others were not made aware of the full circumstances or consequences of the BID process. By the time we became aware, it was too late. The fact that many people have paid the BID's demand does not mean they support the BID. Far from it. They have been left with no option but to pay South Hams Council, the collector. South Hams Council's somewhat cavalier attitude to the BID process and its current oppressive approach to enforcement on the BID's behalf will not benefit the residents of Dartmouth, but simply the fortunate few in ­control of the loot.