Clarification of Remarks During Contact-Centre Review
Filed: 9 October 2025
Reference Code: PC-278
Filename: 2025-10-09_Core_PC-278_CFC_ClarificationOfRemarks_ToneAndAuthority.pdf
Court Labels: Central Family Court, Westminster Children’s Services, Every Child Contact Centre, Contact Conduct & Welfare Oversight
Search Description: Formal clarification email asserting lawful parental authority and contextualising misunderstood remarks.
I. What Happened
On 9 October 2025, following the contact-centre review, the Director of SWANK London Ltd. issued a written clarification to Westminster Children’s Services. The correspondence addressed a minor linguistic controversy arising from a meeting where the Local Authority once again mistook articulation for arrogance and calm analysis for contempt.
The message was composed in the Director’s customary blend of courtesy, irony, and forensic restraint — a reminder that verbal precision is not aggression merely because it unsettles mediocrity.
II. What the Email Establishes
The author communicates exclusively through the authorised service channel (director@swanklondon.com), in compliance with Court Order M03CL193.
The Local Authority is reminded that foster carers act in loco parentis — a term apparently exotic to Westminster — and are thus obliged to serve the children’s welfare rather than administrative ego.
The so-called “controversial remark” was a linguistic flourish, not contempt, and in fact an elegant moral calibration: adults entrusted with the children should behave with the same dignity and intelligence the children display naturally.
The communication restores hierarchy: children first, bureaucracy second, tone police nowhere.
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because every institution that misreads eloquence as insolence deserves a footnote in the Mirror Court.
Because language matters.
Because “snobbery in service of social justice” is not an apology — it’s a mission statement.
IV. Violations and Omissions
Persistent procedural ignorance of the meaning of in loco parentis.
Misrepresentation of lawful parental commentary as “discourtesy.”
Continued correspondence breaches via unauthorised email addresses (GDPR, Art. 5(1)(f)).
V. SWANK’s Position
The Clarification Letter stands as both compliance and critique — a velvet correction of institutional tone-deafness. It confirms that the mother’s articulation remains steady, factual, and unimpressed by bureaucratic fragility.
To misinterpret poise as provocation is a Westminster tradition; SWANK merely documents it for posterity.
Filed with stainless diction and moderate disdain,
Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
director@swanklondon.com
Motto: “Snobbery in Service of Social Justice.”