I SUPPOSE I should be pleased that Robert Scully (letters 16/01/2019) is so delighted with the work performed by Severn Trent, writes Dave Cliff.

I am certainly surprised that anyone could find the state of the road down Culver Hill “in a better condition than it was before work started”.

His enthusiasm for the “engineers” and the company generally appears laudable, though having suffered at the hands of the company for so long perhaps he’s experiencing some sort of ‘Stockholm syndrome’.

To me the fact that the road was closed to through traffic for 12 weeks and returned to common use without it having been fully resurfaced remains a disgrace and that was the main point of my earlier letter.

In reply to my questions to Gloucestershire Highways, I received a prompt and thorough reply to the effect that although the authority might wish that it could force a utilities company to totally resurface, under present law this is just not possible.

Perhaps then, the law should be amended so that in cases where projects involve major disruption, private companies are made responsible for total width restoration?

In the meantime, and before Severn Trent start digging outside my front door on Selsley Road, will Glos Highways Authority, out of its annual road maintenance budget, undertake to make up the difference in cost between part and full resurfacing?

It needs doing anyway, so why not just do it in partnership with Severn Trent thus minimising costs and public inconvenience?

Dave Cliff

North Woodchester