I am writing to protest on Marlene Winfield's behalf at the grossly unsympathetic manner in which her excellent column in The Lawyer (8 September) had been edited.
I appreciate that in any publication there are space constraints, (particularly in opinion columns) but why was your sub-editor allowed to cut the part of Ms Winfield's piece where she referred her builder to the Office for the Supervision of Cowboy Builders (OSCB) for failing to confirm their terms of business in writing and failing to keep her informed of her costs liability?
By how much did the OSCB cut the builder's bill and how much compensation was the builder ordered to pay? Has the builder's obvious failure not only to comply with practice rule 15 but also to apply to the OSCB for a remuneration certificate been referred to the Society of Cowboy Builders' Disciplinary Tribunal? Or is this yet another instance of OSCB failure which has resulted in Ms Winfield referring her case to the Building Services Ombudsman?
How are we to draw any conclusions from Ms Winfield's sorry but doubtless instructive tale if she is not permitted to give the full story?