Chromatic v Westminster City Council: On the Repeated Disregard of Written Disability Declarations and the Fiction of “Non-Engagement”

---

⟡ A Deafening Silence: Twelve Months of Disability Declarations No One Read ⟡
“Reasonable adjustments were not just refused. They were deleted.”

---

Filed: 30 June 2025
Reference: SWANK/WCC/ADD-DISCLUREFAIL-0625
📎 Download PDF – 2025-06-30_SWANK_Addendum_DisabilityNotifications_IgnoredEqualityDuties.pdf
One-year timeline of written disability notifications that Westminster Children’s Services refused to acknowledge.

---

I. What Happened

From January 2024 through January 2025, Polly Chromatic submitted repeated written notifications to Westminster Children’s Services and related agencies documenting her severe asthma, diagnosed muscle tension dysphonia, PTSD, and medical need to communicate in writing. Despite this extensive record — which includes formal notices, medical letters, court filings, and Google Drive access logs — no lawful reasonable adjustment was ever made.

Emails were ignored. Documents were unread. The parent was told to “speak” or risk escalation.

---

II. What the Complaint Establishes

• Systematic disregard of written disability notifications

• Complete failure to provide reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act 2010

• Weaponisation of “non-engagement” allegations against a disabled parent

• Institutional refusal to acknowledge submitted documentation

• Discrimination against a parent for using lawful written methods of communication

• Retaliation through safeguarding escalation rather than accommodation

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because institutions pretend there is “no evidence” — even when there is a year’s worth.
Because statutory duties are being replaced with bureaucratic evasion.
Because “reasonable adjustments” are treated like a favour, not a legal obligation.

This was not a miscommunication. It was a structured refusal to acknowledge disability.

The aesthetic of silence was not mutual. It was manufactured.

---

IV. Violations

• Equality Act 2010 – Failure to make reasonable adjustments

• Children Act 1989 – Breach of parental rights and duties

• Human Rights Act 1998 – Article 8 ECHR (right to private and family life)

• Care Act 2014 – Neglect of parental wellbeing and safeguarding harm

• Public Sector Equality Duty (s.149 Equality Act) – Ignored entirely

---

V. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept that disability must be shouted to be heard.
We do not accept the notion that a mother’s silence — caused by illness — can be weaponised against her.
We do not accept that paperwork sent, read, and archived can be ignored for convenience.

This wasn’t a communication gap. It was a discriminatory strategy.
This wasn’t procedural safeguarding. It was performative amnesia.

⟡ This Dispatch Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. ⟡
Every entry is timestamped.
Every sentence is jurisdictional.
Every structure is protected.

This is not a blog.
This is a legal-aesthetic instrument.
Filed with velvet contempt, preserved for future litigation.

© 2025 SWANK London Ltd. All formatting and structural rights reserved.
Use requires express permission or formal licence. Unlicensed mimicry will be cited — as panic, not authorship.

---