PETER Curran (Letters, October 2) makes an interesting point about deliberate ambiguities in collective agreements. But he is wrong to say it is the lawyers who can’t grasp the essence of these. My experience from decades of drafting contractual agreements is that it is the clients who struggle with this.

Take that most useful word “reasonable”. Almost invariably when I propose insertion of that adjective the question is asked of me: what does “reasonable” mean? When I say I don’t know the initial response is incredulity followed by smug mockery of my chosen profession. But then I point out that what it means is this: “Let’s leave that argument till after we’ve both retired.” The reaction is then admiration and relief. I am hailed as a genius. Which of course is what I am.

Donald Reid,

120 Henderland Road, Bearsden.

NOT to mince words or pass over the opportunity to be both politically and grammatically incorrect I confess that recent correspondence over split infinitives, totties, tatties, taters and so on (Letters, September 26-October 3) diverts me to thoughts of “hot totty” (tottie), far removed from dull and unshapely mashed potatoes (Urban Dictionary - totty - British slang for sexy women).

On further reflection methinks I'll stick to hot toddy and chips.

R Russell Smith,

96 Milton Road, Kilbirnie.