After Clandon, what will be the incentive to prevent fires?

Dear Editor,

I have read with great interest your article on Clandon Park as we live a few miles away. After the shock of the fire we put our hopes in the restoration process thinking that, as was the case with Uppark, Hampton Court and Windsor Castle, the house would be brought back to its former condition with the help of skilled craftsmanship. We voted for our choice of architects and waited for the news we thought must be imminent of when work would start.

It was therefore a shock to hear of the plans to leave Clandon as a ruin and I feel very let down by the National Trust. I agree with the questions you have raised in your article and we had noticed some of the inconsistences in the NT narrative. Furthermore, there was no consultation with members of the local community about the complete change of mind. Will people really want to visit a ruined house for decades to come? Perhaps those who gave donations for the restoration will request their money back and complain to the Charities Commission? Where is the incentive to prevent fires in other properties and obtain adequate insurance cover if fire-damaged properties are not returned to their original state?

E. Robson
Life Member, NT