Alan Titcombe's letter (Wiltshire Times November 7), criticising Westbury Town Council for conclusively deciding to become trustee of our town hall, contained many misleading claims which deserve a response.

Mr Titcombe is a director of a body which failed in its bid to become the trustee of the Laverton Institute after saying it could not run the trust on a viable basis. His bitter, twisted perspective is therefore unsurprising.

The unsubstantiated claims I object to were: that a councillor who is a quantity surveyor failed to comment on the absence of a building survey and other relevant information; suggested bias by district councillors; political manoeuvrings; and incompetence.

As Mr Titcombe meant me and I'm a chartered valuation surveyor (not a QS), he has now apologised for this particular error.

A building survey report was prepared in 1998 which confirms the 130-year-old building is generally in good condition and outlined estimated costs for maintenance, repairs and modernisation. Some works have already been done and other estimates have been informally updated.

During the debate, I specifically pointed out that I've considered all relevant details. The five-year budget is based on income and cost estimates compiled by a manage-

ment team, including myself, in preparation for becoming trustee. I also pointed out that Modern halls in Westbury are so busy that it's difficult to get bookings, so more research is unnecessary . My final point was that Westbury's district councillors didn't want disposal of the Laverton and were entitled to vote.

Incompetence? Who?

R Hawker

Westbury Town and West Wiltshire District councillor