The owners of an historic pub have come in for a bit of flak this week after their plans to turn the former watering hole into a jazzy new restaurant were revealed.

The loss of a favoured - if a little run-down - community hub is more acceptable to the hoi polloi if it is being turned into something bearing some resemblance to its former guise.

However it will be unbearably galling to former One Bell patrons that four flats will be also added to the building.

When campaigner Sara Maloney successfully got the pub listed as an “asset of community value” last year, she assumed it could not be altered so drastically, especially without her or any of her fellow campaigners being informed of the proposals.

Watford Borough Council said this week that it was not legally obliged to contact them or any of the thousands of people who signed a petition calling for The One Bell to remain a pub.

But would a little courtesy in this instance be too much to ask for?

The sentimental value of this establishment would have been clear to anyone working in the council’s planning department.

This kind of response – the “we stuck to the letter of the law so everything’s fine” line – is exactly how public trust in such processes is eroded.

Should residents not expect a decent dialogue between them and their representatives when controversial projects come to the fore?

If not, you quickly descend into accusations along the lines of trying to sweep the matter under the carpet.

And once the public lose trust in the powers that be, it’s very difficult to get back.