My wife has a 19-year-old daughter who has Down's syndrome.

As she is unable to walk very far, for the past six years she has been eligible for a Motability vehicle, which enables her carer (my wife) to provide her with transport.

Three years ago, my wife made the very noble sacrifice of donating me a kidney in order that I might lead a normal life unbonded to a dialysis machine. While we were in hospital, some teenagers joy-rode the Motability vehicle, causing nearly £2,000 in damage.

No charges were laid and the insurance company covered the cost.

Last year, the Sunday before Christmas, we were returning to Uckfield from a carol service.

We passed through Barcombe, then came upon a stretch of water outside Shortsbridge, above which peeped two or three inches of what appeared to be a kerbstone.

As there were no flood warning signs and we adjudged the water to be no more than six or seven inches deep, we drove in.

The "kerbstone" turned out to be the top of a duct-run wall and in no time the water was over the bonnet.

What followed was a terrifying ordeal involving the car floating towards some fields and us abandoning the vehicle.

We took refuge in the house of a kind couple who informed us the road had been flooded for some five hours and they could not comprehend why warning signs had not been erected by nightfall.

A phone call next day to East Sussex County Council was answered by a man who immediately exonerated the council from any blame.

The vehicle could not be salvaged until the following afternoon and was written off. Motability's insurance company pointed the finger of blame at my wife and will not lease her any more vehicles as she is considered a bad risk, despite never having caused an accident in more than 30 years of driving and being blameless for both the incidents in which Motability's vehicles were damaged.

Most seriously, this decision has greatly reduced her daughter's mobility. She will not be able to go to see her friends in Newick and Crowborough or attend her youth club in Heathfield or drama classes in Falmer.

I have just commenced a four-year contract in outback Australia and will be unable to purchase a vehicle until late 2004 because of the exchange rate.

Apart from the yobs who joy-rode the first vehicle, the council has much to answer for.

* An East Sussex County Council spokeswoman replies: We were not aware of the flooding until it was reported by the police. According to our records, the call was received shortly prior to the incident involving Mrs Hendey. The gang was already on its way to erect warning signs when the incident occurred. In the circumstances, it would appear the council took all reasonable steps to warn motorists as soon as notification was received. The council greatly regrets the damage caused to the vehicle driven by Mrs Hendey but there was no other action that could have been taken to avoid the loss.

-A Motability spokeswoman responds: Motability customers use their higher-rate disability living allowance to contract-hire a car on the scheme, which includes comprehensive insurance, maintenance and servicing costs and RAC roadside recovery. For those customers responsible for a series of substantial claims, it is necessary to put controls in place, set to keep costs as low as possible for our 400,000 customers. This can lead to the customers in question paying additional insurance excess or premium or, in specific cases, their insurance being declined. If this occurs, the customer can no longer have a car through the contract hire scheme. Customers are able to appeal against this decision by contacting the Motability grievance team on 01279 635666. In this instance, we understand Mrs Hendey appealed against the decision to withdraw insurance cover but was unsuccessful. However, we are in contact with Mrs Hendey and are reviewing her circumstances.