Referral to Social Work England
Regarding the Conduct of Ms Kirsty Hornal – Retaliatory Safeguarding, Disability Contempt, and Abuse of Registered Authority
Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens
London W2
✉ director@swanklondon.com
🌐 www.swanklondon.com
2 June 2025
To:
Professional Standards Directorate
Social Work England
✉ enquiries@socialworkengland.org.uk
Subject: Formal Fitness to Practise Referral – Kirsty Hornal (Westminster Children’s Services)
Concerning Misuse of Safeguarding Powers, Procedural Malfeasance, and Discriminatory Conduct toward a Disabled Litigant
Dear Professional Standards Team,
I write, with the requisite exhaustion of one too frequently targeted by institutional disdain, to raise a formal referral against Ms Kirsty Hornal, social worker employed by Westminster City Council Children’s Services, whose recent conduct has pierced the boundaries of professional decency and landed squarely in the domain of coercive misconduct.
🕯 The Incident in Brief — Though Nothing About It Was Briefly Endured
On 31 May 2025, Ms Hornal issued me an unsolicited and aggressive email, stating that “the local authority is applying to court for a supervision order.” The communication was:
Unanchored in legal reality, risk evidence, or safeguarding protocol
Devoid of procedural grounding, and therefore gratuitously menacing
A retaliatory dispatch, sent in the midst of my civil claim against her employer
A flagrant disregard of my disability accommodations, which prohibit surprise escalations or verbal manoeuvrings
Delivered as if law were theatre, and I, its unwillingly cast antagonist
One does not need a law degree — though I have certainly acted as though I hold several — to see this was not safeguarding. It was retribution masquerading as duty.
⚖ Enumerated Breaches of Professional Standards
The following Professional Standards, issued by your own body, were treated by Ms Hornal as optional décor:
1.6 – Failing to treat me as an individual or to respect my legal and medical status
1.7 – Communicating in a manner that was neither appropriate, open, nor honest — unless one considers veiled threats a form of transparency
1.9 – Exploiting her statutory position to intimidate, not protect
2.2 – Collapsing the necessary boundary between professional role and personal vendetta
5.4 – Causing risk, not mitigating it; undermining confidence in social work as a domain of safeguarding rather than silencing
🎭 Context – Which She Cannot Claim to Have Missed
I am a disabled mother of four, managing complex PTSD and muscle tension dysphonia — conditions formally documented and acknowledged by Westminster multiple times. My written-only communication directive has been repeatedly submitted. Yet, Ms Hornal chose to escalate through litigation theatre without process, consultation, or lawful basis. Her actions are not merely improper — they are institutionally corrosive.
Police involvement (Ref: ROC10979-25-0101-IR) has been necessitated. That, in itself, is an indictment of this profession’s failure to police its own.
🗂 Documents Available for Your Review
Exhibit A: Ms Hornal’s email (31 May 2025)
Exhibit B: Communication directives and medical documentation
Exhibit C: Metropolitan Police report, filed 2 June 2025
Exhibit D: Civil litigation materials proving conflict of interest
🧾 Remedy Sought
I request, in the interests of public trust and professional integrity, that Social Work England initiate an immediate fitness to practise review. This is not a matter of “conflict resolution.” It is a matter of removing individuals who weaponise statutory authority for bureaucratic vengeance.
I trust that Social Work England wishes to be perceived not merely as a registration body, but as a guardian of ethical standards. Please do not let this one pass beneath the rug so many others have already vanished under.
Yours, exquisitely unimpressed,
Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens, London W2
www.swanklondon.com
✉ director@swanklondon.com
⚠ Written Communication Only – View Policy
No comments:
Post a Comment
This archive is a witness table, not a control panel.
We do not moderate comments. We do, however, read them, remember them, and occasionally reframe them for satirical or educational purposes.
If you post here, you’re part of the record.
Civility is appreciated. Candour is immortal.