C152 PLT UTILIZING VFR FLY THROUGH RTE NEAR LAX IS QUESTIONED BY ATC REGARDING ALT.

Narrative

I'M WRITING THIS LETTER TO INFORM YOU OF A POSSIBLE PLT VFR DEV. ON APR/TUE/04; I WAS FLYING VFR AND I WAS CLRED TO ENTER CLASS B AIRSPACE VIA THE SHORELINE RTE. THE CURRENT VFR TERMINAL AREA CHART HAS THE PUBLISHED ALTS FROM 2500-4000 FT. RELYING ON MY CURRENT VFR CHART; I MAINTAINED AN ALT OF 3500 FT BUT AFTER LNDG AT MY DEST; I WAS TOLD TO WRITE DOWN A TELEPHONE NUMBER BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF A VFR DEV OF ALT. WHEN I CALLED THIS NUMBER; I WAS INFORMED THAT I DID NOT MAINTAIN THE PROPER ALT OF 3500-4500 FT THAT IS REQUIRED FOR THE SHORELINE RTE. THIS ALT IS A DIFFERENT ALT THAN THE ONE PUBLISHED IN MY CURRENT VFR TERMINAL AREA CHART. I WAS INFORMED THAT I DEVIATED BELOW THE MINIMUM ALT OF 3500 FT. WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND IS THAT IF MY CURRENT VFR TERMINAL AREA CHART STATES THE REQUIRED ALT IS BTWN 2500-4000 FT AND ATC REQUIREMENT IS BTWN 3500-4500 FT AND I MAINTAINED MY ALT ABOVE THE CURRENT PUBLISHED MINIMUM REQUIREMENT; WHY WAS I ACCUSED OF AN ALTDEV? I BELIEVE THAT PLTS FLYING BY THE CURRENT PUBLISHED INFO IN THEIR CHARTS SHOULD NOT BE ACCUSED OF A POSSIBLE VFR PLTDEV. I ALSO BELIEVE THAT ATC SHOULD NOT HOLD YOU ACCOUNTABLE FOR A NEW/DIFFERENT REG THAT THEY ARE USING; WHICH IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PLT'S CURRENT CHARTS. I BELIEVE THAT IT IS A GOOD PRACTICE FOR ATC NOT TO IMPOSE A NEW/DIFFERENT REG ON PLTS USING CURRENT CHARTS WHICH ARE DIFFERENT FROM THEIRS UNTIL THE NEXT CURRENT PUBLISHED CHART BECOMES AVAILABLE; BECAUSE THE PLT HAS NO WAY OF KNOWING THAT THE INFO IN THEIR CURRENT CHARTS IS NOT BEING USED BY ATC OR THAT DIFFERENT REGS HAVE BEEN ADDED OR DELETED.