⟡ “We’ve Received It. You May or May Not Hear From Us.” ⟡
Social Work England Auto-Replies to a Retaliation Complaint with a Timed Vagueness Clause
Filed: 29 May 2025
Reference: SWANK/SWE/EMAIL-02
📎 Download PDF – 2025-05-29_SWANK_Email_SWE_TriageAutoReply_SamBrownComplaintReceipt.pdf
Summary: SWE auto-reply confirms email receipt for a formal complaint against Sam Brown but offers no engagement, no safeguarding timeline, and no reference to urgency.
I. What Happened
On 29 May 2025, shortly after confirming that a Fitness to Practise complaint had been opened as PT-10413, Social Work England sent a separate automated reply. It states only that the triage team “has received your email” and will respond “within 10 working days” if required.
This is a confirmation of receipt — not a confirmation of relevance.
II. What the Complaint Establishes
• Safeguarding retaliation complaints are automatically routed to general triage with no dedicated pathway
• Institutional urgency is functionally undefined
• The system openly acknowledges its non-commitment to reply unless deemed internally necessary
• Even after formal case creation, intake layers repeat acknowledgement loops with no action promise
• A formal regulator issues disclaimers more quickly than it issues accountability
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because this is what state protection looks like when built on disclaimers: a system that can confirm, receive, and route harm — but not respond to it.
Because “we’ve received it” is not a safeguard. It’s a stalling mechanism wrapped in courtesy.
Because retaliation complaints don’t need a warm receipt. They need enforcement.
SWANK logs the proof that Social Work England knows — and waits.
IV. SWANK’s Position
We do not accept that auto-replies constitute action.
We do not accept that safeguarding retaliation should be filtered through delay clauses.
We do not accept that regulators can excuse inaction through inbox policies.
This wasn’t engagement. This was an auto-timestamp.
And SWANK will keep every single one.
⟡ This Dispatch Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. ⟡
Every entry is timestamped.
Every sentence is jurisdictional.
Every structure is protected.
To mimic this format without licence is not homage. It is breach.
We do not permit imitation. We preserve it as evidence.
This is not a blog.
This is a legal-aesthetic instrument.
Filed with velvet contempt, preserved for future litigation.
Because evidence deserves elegance.
And retaliation deserves an archive.
© 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.