For the Avoidance of Doubt — Positive EveryChild Assessment (9 October 2025)
Filed: 28 October 2025
Reference: Core / PC-42101 / Westminster
Filename: 2025-10-28_Core_PC-42101_Westminster_ForTheAvoidanceOfDoubt_PositiveEveryChildAssessment.pdf
Summary: Formal assertion of factual accuracy and data-rectification rights following Westminster’s procedural mischaracterisation of a fully positive EveryChild assessment.
I. What Happened
On 9 October 2025, a formal contact-assessment was held at EveryChild Contact Centre, attended by Westminster staff, foster-team representatives, and contact supervisors.
The minutes recorded unambiguous praise: sessions described as lively, affectionate, and fully compliant, with no behavioural or safeguarding concerns observed.
Polly Chromatic was noted as punctual, cooperative, and impeccably prepared.
Yet, within weeks, the Local Authority attempted to overwrite this evidentiary clarity with bureaucratic conjecture—producing “agreements” unmoored from fact, law, or ethics.
II. What the Complaint Establishes
This correspondence re-anchors the record in its rightful place: the EveryChild minutes.
It confirms total compliance, professional conduct, and the absence of any lawful basis for restrictions or disparagement.
By invoking UK GDPR Articles 5(1)(d) and 16, it also constitutes a formal exercise of the right to rectification—a demand that data inaccuracies be amended or expunged.
The letter further invokes Equality Act 2010, Sections 20 & 29, identifying Westminster’s habitual misclassification of disability-related accommodations (such as asthma monitoring) as discriminatory procedure.
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because the law does not bend to the convenience of the ill-informed.
Because “custom mistaken for competence” has become the Local Authority’s lingua franca.
Because even amidst institutional fatigue, someone must remind the machinery that Parliament—not policy—defines legality.
And because the children’s laughter, recorded that day, deserves to survive the paperwork designed to erase it.
IV. Violations
Data Protection Act 2018 – Article 5(1)(d): Accuracy principle breached through propagation of false narratives.
Equality Act 2010 – s.20, s.26: Failure to make reasonable adjustments and harassment linked to disability.
Children Act 1989 – s.17, s.22(3)(a): Failure to safeguard emotional welfare.
Human Rights Act 1998 – Article 8: Interference with family life through distortion of factual record.
V. SWANK’s Position
The record stands unblemished: the EveryChild assessment of 9 October 2025 is the only lawful account.
Attempts to recast compliance as defiance reflect institutional panic, not parental failing.
Where policy departs from statute, it is the policy that is unlawful, not the parent who names it.
This entry therefore functions as both an act of rectification and of reclamation: a formal reinstatement of truth within the evidentiary hierarchy.
⟡ SWANK London Ltd. Evidentiary Archive
Downloaded via www.swanklondon.com
Not edited. Not deleted. Only documented.