DAVID MONK, of Bantham, writes: I was disappointed that your article published on October 17 under the heading 'Church cross with EDF' gave some ­credence to what I see as ­misrepresentations of the truth. The Rip Off Britain team was unable to resolve the problem but was disappointed that Ofgem and EDF Energy, who work together, did not make a reasonable offer. It suggested to the church that it put the issue on Twitter in the hope that this might lead to a more positive response from EDF Energy. The Church has followed that advice and on Twitter has suggested that anyone sympathetic to the church's position might consider changing their energy supplier if they were with EDF energy, as that might assist the church's position. You mention that approximately £5,000 of electricity has been produced by the church panels that has been generated to the grid, yet the church has received nothing. EDF Energy must be laughing all the way to the bank. You quote EDF as though you had spoken to it directly, but the comments you publish seem to be direct from the programme. The church has pointed out to Rip Off Britain that by televising the comments of EDF Energy and not checking them with the church they are in danger of giving the quotes ­credence, which if they were not true goes against the ethos of the programme. The church is going to discuss this further with the programme producers. You seem to have followed the same process, also with the danger of giving misrepresentations of the truth some ­credence. You say that under the legislation the church ­needed an Energy Performance Certificate, but under that ­legislation churches are exempt. I have details of a number of churches that have been told they are exempt and who have never provided an EPC, yet are receiving the right tariff, some as close as Totnes. I also know of a few churches in a similar position to ourselves. EDF Energy says the church was late providing an EPC, but this was only because it considers the date for the application being when it assessed it, which was four months after it received it by recorded delivery. How illogical is that? You state that we were misinformed about the need for an EPC by the independent adviser and do not quote this as the view of EDF Energy. This challenges the professional integrity and professionalism of the British Research Establishment, which is an important body, and it is still adamant that the church is exempt from needing to ­provide an EPC. I think we can take it that even Ofgem and EDF Energy know that the Independent Assessor is right, because if it treated us as a church we could dispute its decision. They do not have the courage to do this and so classify the church as a day centre, because as such it would need an EPC. We look like a church, we ­worship as a church and we are proud to be a place of worship – not, not, not a day centre. I was pleased to see you ­plainly thought this ridiculous because you do ask what day centre is licensed to undertake weddings, baptisms and ­funerals? This a complex issue, but we consider the church as being treated unfairly and unjustly by this powerful French company that refuses to even discuss the matter in a reasonable way. I hope this letter will lay some light on the problems and show how unjustly EDF Energy and Ofgem are acting. They do not need any assistance by ­misrepresentations of the facts being given any credence at all. We would like to think we have your support.