---

🦚 On Transfers, Technicalities, and the Gentle Art of Washing One’s Hands: A Follow-Up from RBKC’s Customer Relationship Team

Filed under the documentation of jurisdictional retreat and retrospective minimisation.

---

17 March 2025
To: Polly

---

📜 Dear Polly,

We write further to your email of 11 March 2025 concerning RBKC Social Care involvement with your family.

Your persistence is noted. Our distancing, however, remains firmly in place.

---

🧾 On Proof, Timing, and Transfer

We acknowledge receipt of the emails you submitted, evidencing direct interaction with Samira.

However, upon further investigation — and, one assumes, a meticulous review of the chronology — it appears that:

• Your case was closed to RBKC in March 2024,

• Following its transfer to Westminster, upon discovery that your residence fell within their borough boundaries.

The location of one’s postal code, it seems, determines the location of one’s institutional memory.

It is our understanding that:

• Only one home visit was conducted by Sally and her manager aka her mommy,

• Which you agreed to.

Thus, we assert that RBKC’s involvement formally ceased following this transfer.

---

📚 On Current Concerns and Cross-Borough Administration

The concerns you have raised, therefore:

• Are understood to pertain to Westminster;

• Have already been the subject of several correspondences exchanged with you.

Jurisdiction, like affection, has its administrative limits.

---

📜 Yours sincerely,

Customer Relationship Team
Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

---

---

🦚 Response to Complaint Ref: 15083377 – Reaffirmation of Facts, Formality, and the Request for Procedural Competence

Filed under the documentation of evidence reaffirmation, cross-borough evasion, and the constitutional demand for administrative literacy.

---

12 March 2025
To:
Customer Relationship Team
Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC)
Subject: Response to Complaint Ref: 15083377 – Reaffirmation of Facts, Formality, and the Request for Procedural Competence

---

🧾 Dear Customer Relationship Team,

Thank you for your recent correspondence regarding Complaint Ref: 15083377 —
though I must observe, with due politeness, that the content is both puzzling and disheartening.

I am compelled, yet again, to clarify what ought to be a matter of basic internal record:

RBKC social workers have, demonstrably and indisputably, been involved in my case.

This is not supposition.
It is documented reality —
substantiated through correspondence, assessments, and direct professional contact originating from your department.

Accordingly:

I expect any further attempts at strategic denial to cease,
and for this matter to be reviewed with the seriousness the contradiction demands.

---

📜 Cross-Borough Courtesy (But Not a Deflection)

While I have extended the courtesy of informing Westminster social care services of related concerns,
this in no way diminishes — nor displaces — RBKC’s own responsibilities.

The complaint pertains to the actions and omissions of RBKC personnel,
and must be investigated by RBKC with due rigour and impartiality.

---

📚 Submission of Evidence: A Logistical Request

As previously noted, I am in possession of extensive documentation, including:

• Emails;

• Official assessments;

• Written communications with RBKC social workers.

To facilitate the appropriate review, kindly confirm:

• The correct email address or portal for submission;

• Any specific format or naming conventions required for internal processing.

Efficiency, once requested politely, must now be solicited firmly.

---

🩻 Disability Accommodations & Record Access – Ongoing Concerns

Parallel to the primary complaint, I remind RBKC of its obligations regarding:

• Implementation of reasonable adjustments, in line with the Equality Act 2010;

• Full access to all personal records, without fragmentation, deferral, or strategic redirection.

I expect written confirmation that these matters:

• Are being actioned appropriately;

• Will be reflected in all future correspondence and procedural handling.

---

📜 Next Steps – Kindly Clarify Timeline and Receipt

I request:

• Written confirmation of receipt of this correspondence;

• Clear instructions for submission of supporting evidence;

• A formal outline of the expected timeline for the substantive review of this complaint.

Given the prior confusion, contradiction, and procedural contortion,

I trust you will appreciate my insistence on precision, transparency, and exhaustive documentation going forward.

---

📜 Yours,

With due constitutional formality and procedural vigilance,
Polly

---

---

🦚 On Document Requests, Information Handoffs, and the Art of Institutional Distancing: A Response from RBKC’s Customer Relationship Team

Filed under the documentation of bureaucratic modesty, record compartmentalisation, and cross-borough finger-pointing.

---

12 March 2025
To: Polly

---

📜 Dear Polly,

Thank you for your email.

---

🧾 On Documentation and the Burden of Proof

Kindly forward to us the documentation you possess evidencing your correspondence with RBKC social workers,

so that we might appropriately investigate and respond to your concerns.

The onus, naturally, lies with you — though the records, presumably, should also exist within our own archives.

---

📚 On Access to Records and the Strategic Redistribution of Requests

Should you wish to formally access records held by RBKC, please direct your request to:

📩 DataProtection@rbkc.gov.uk
(Information Management Team)

They will contact you separately to request the requisite proofs of identity, thereby ensuring that access to your own documentation remains, as always, duly procedural.

Transparency, it appears, is a distant cousin to accessibility.

---

🧭 On Which Borough Now Bears the Badge

We note that:

• No external agencies are involved in your case (a statement that gently sidesteps previous confusion);

• Social care involvement rests with Westminster, rather than with RBKC.

Thus, responsibility is neatly relocated — if not entirely explained.

---

📜 Kind regards,

Customer Relationship Team
Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

---

---

🦚 On Institutional Denial and the Gentle Art of Not My Department: A Formal Response from RBKC

Filed under the documentation of polite rejection and administrative boundary-drawing.

---

11 March 2025
Our reference: 15083377
To: Polly

---

📜 Dear Polly,

Subject: Your complaint, Reference 15083377

Thank you for your complaint, received on 11 March 2025.

---

🧾 On Why This Is, Apparently, Not Our Problem

Unfortunately, we must inform you that we are unable to deal with your complaint, as — in the considered view of this department —

the complaint is not for this organisation.

RBKC social workers, we are assured, are not presently involved with your family.

Conclusion:
Thus, your concerns — however articulated or documented — have been filed neatly into the category of someone else’s business.

---

📚 If We Have Misunderstood (Which, Naturally, Is Not Assumed)

Should you feel that our understanding of your concerns is incomplete, you are, of course, welcome to correct us.

Alternatively — and more conveniently for our correspondence metrics — if you remain dissatisfied,

you may now proceed to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (the Ombudsman).

---

🧭 On Your Journey to the Ombudsman

The Ombudsman investigates:

• Individual complaints about councils;

• All adult social care providers;

• Some organisations providing local public services.

It operates:

• Fairly;

• Impartially;

• Free of charge (though rarely free of procedural delay).

Please note:

• You usually have up to 12 months to make your complaint, starting from the date you first knew about the issue —
  not from the date of this letter (an important technicality).

• Some matters may be outside their jurisdiction, in which case they will explain — firmly but courteously — why your concerns shall be dismissed elsewhere.

---

📜 Important Administrative Note

When approaching the Ombudsman, you will need to provide:

• A copy of this letter;

• All earlier responses received from us (should you still possess the originals in unredacted form).

This will allow the Ombudsman to consider your complaint — with, one hopes, more appetite for engagement.

---

📜 Yours bureaucratically,

The Customer Relationship Team
Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea

---