⟡ ADDENDUM – COMMUNICATION VIOLATIONS BY RBKC SOCIAL WORKER SAMIRA ISSA ⟡
Filed: 18 May 2025
Reference: SWANK/RBKC/SAMIRA-ISSA/COMMUNICATION-VIOLATIONS-ADDENDUM
Download PDF: 2025-05-18_Core_PC-108_RBKC_SamiraIssa_CommunicationViolationsAddendum.pdf
Summary: Supplementary addendum filed to accompany the N1 Civil Claim and Judicial Review, expanding evidentiary coverage of repeated communication violations by Samira Issa of RBKC Children’s Services. The document evidences a medically recognised disability adjustment — written-only communication — that was deliberately ignored, resulting in physical endangerment, emotional harm, and procedural retaliation.
I. What Happened
Between February and March 2024, social worker Samira Issa continued to demand verbal or in-person contact despite receiving multiple written medical notices confirming that such contact posed serious respiratory risk.
The addendum presents key exhibits:
• 9 February 2024: Claimant explicitly wrote —
“I cannot talk on the phone. I will not speak verbally anywhere. Please respect that.”
(Ref: 2024.09.02 Samira 5.096532.pdf)
• 21 February 2024: Claimant reiterated —
“I am sick and am disgusted with your continued harassment.”
(Ref: 2024.09.02 Samira 0.21.pdf)
• Despite these explicit notices, Issa persisted, continuing safeguarding escalation during the claimant’s medical incapacitation following a respiratory collapse and COVID-19 diagnosis.
The pattern is unmistakable: procedure was treated as prerogative, health as inconvenience.
II. What the Document Establishes
• That RBKC Children’s Services failed to implement or respect known medical accommodations in breach of Section 20 of the Equality Act 2010.
• That verbal contact attempts during active illness constituted harassment and discrimination under Sections 26–27 of the same Act.
• That safeguarding escalation following lawful objections was retaliatory.
• That Samira Issa’s conduct represents procedural cruelty masked as care.
III. Why SWANK Logged It
• To ensure each ignored email, each breathless communication demand, is preserved as jurisdictional proof.
• To establish the continuity between personal illness and bureaucratic aggression.
• To document that “communication” — when misused — becomes coercion.
• Because every unlawful request, once recorded, becomes art.
IV. Legal & Regulatory Framework
Statutory Violations:
• Equality Act 2010 – s.20 (failure to provide reasonable adjustments), ss.26–27 (harassment and victimisation).
• Human Rights Act 1998 – Arts. 3, 6, 8, 14 (protection from degrading treatment, fair process, and discrimination).
• Children Act 1989 – s.17 (non-discriminatory safeguarding obligations).
Relief Sought (as per addendum):
• Incorporation into N1 Civil Claim and Judicial Review proceedings.
• Consideration of aggravated damages for emotional, psychological, and physical harm caused by RBKC’s procedural negligence.
V. SWANK’s Position
“When a parent must protect her lungs from her social worker, the welfare system has already collapsed.”
SWANK London Ltd. classifies this addendum as a forensic artefact of medical discrimination.
It reveals how administrative persistence can transgress into medical endangerment — how the polite insistence on “procedure” can function as a weapon against the unwell.
This filing transforms the forgotten emails of February 2024 into a permanent legal record — a ledger of bureaucratic cruelty disguised as contact.
⟡ This Entry 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 deliberate punctuation, preserved for litigation and education.
Because care should not cause injury.
And correspondence should not cause collapse.