Allan Wright, chairman of the residents committee at the Bellerive Retirement Village in Lyons, said the current rules were interpreted differently in different retirement homes, leaving some residents having to pay big maintenance bills.

At Bellerive, the residents' maintenance fund was used for electric water heaters that had broken down. Twice, when the entire unit had to be replaced, the village owner paid. But on three occasions since he had been at Bellerive, the water heaters had been repaired at a cost of $1200, including a new component, and the residents had been asked to pay.

Residents were also paying for repainting the village, and had just entered one painting contract worth $5000.

"Don't get me wrong, the owners are very cooperative and we have a good relationship," Mr Wright said, but he believes in the water heater case, the owner should pay for the cost of new parts, as a capital cost.

"The Act isn't clear, the ambiguity's there," he said.

Bellerive Hindmarsh Retirement, whose national retirement manager, Erik Boddeus, said the the case of water heaters, maintenance was to be paid by residents through recurrent charges, and replacement was paid by owners. But given the differences of opinion and the different approaches across different retirement villages, he also wanted the definitions clarified.

With 2000 residents in 30 retirement villages owned by 20 operators, "you can expect a variety of views", he said.

Hindmarsh chief executive Rowan Hindmarsh stressed any solution must be "practical and workable".

The government has set up an 11-member advisory group including two resident representatives and an owner representative. The chairman of the ACT Retirement Villages Residents Association Alistair Christie said he hoped the group could find a solution, but given the different views it would be "difficult to come to a resolution that will suit everybody", he said.

While it was clear that in villages where tenants rented their units, such as Bellerive, owners were responsible for maintenance the debate was about how much of each item should come from a capital works fund and how much should come from residents' maintenance payments, he said.

The legislation says owners are responsible for capital maintenance, but can fund it from a capital works fund for the village if there is one, or from a recurrent-charges fund.

A spokesperson for the justice directorate said it became clear during consultation last year that there were "quite different interpretations" of capital maintenance. The advisory group was considering the definition, with no decisions made.