Chromatic v. Elgin Crescent & Co (Sewage Damage, Voice Loss, and Safeguarding Disgrace)

---

⟡ SWANK London Ltd. Evidentiary Catalogue

The Flat That Tried to Kill Us: Sewage, Surveillance, and Section 20 Pressure

Filed Date: 14 July 2025
Reference Code: SWANK-A11-ELGIN-CHAT
Court File Name: 2025-07-14_Addendum_ElginCrescent_HousingHazard_WhatsAppEvidence
1-line Summary: WhatsApp chat with landlord confirms sewage-related housing hazard, illness, displacement, and ignored safety warnings.

---

I. What Happened

This document contains a WhatsApp transcript between Polly Chromatic and Elad Katz, landlord agent for the hazardous tenancy at 37E Elgin Crescent, W11 2JD. The messages span June to December 2023 and chronicle a months-long pattern of:

• Neglected repairs

• Exposure to cracked sewer pipes

• Repeated illness of Polly and her four children

• Admissions by the agent that Thames Water and communal building managers were involved

• Polly's inability to remain in the home due to severe asthma attacks, lost voice, and dizziness

• Eventual forced hotel displacement

• And—finally—Elad’s departure, handing the case to Chestertons.

---

II. What the Complaint Establishes

This transcript provides real-time, contemporaneous evidence that:

• The housing was medically unsafe.

• The landlord and agent were repeatedly informed of health risks.

• The situation required Thames Water intervention.

• The family was displaced due to environmental illness.

• Polly explicitly stated that she could not speak due to the damage caused by the flat, months prior to her documented voice impairment diagnosis.

• These issues predated Westminster’s safeguarding escalation—rendering the subsequent retaliatory EPO both procedurally and morally perverse.

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

SWANK London Ltd. is formally recording this chat to refute Westminster Children’s Services' insinuation that the family’s housing concerns were unfounded or secondary. The cause of medical trauma, silence, and displacement is clearly established here. This chat is a pre-safeguarding snapshot of the actual origin of institutional harm—before the narrative was weaponised against the mother.

---

IV. Violations

• Article 8, ECHR – Violation of the right to home and family life

• Children Act 1989 – Breach of duty to support a family in environmental danger

• Equality Act 2010 – Failure to accommodate Polly’s disability

• UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities – Denial of health-related accommodation

• Public Health (Control of Disease) Act 1984 – Failure to act on known sewer contamination

• Human Rights Act 1998 – Institutional complicity in the outcome of her vocal and physical impairment

---

V. SWANK’s Position

This document confirms the mother repeatedly raised concerns about illness and uninhabitable conditions prior to any social work intervention. Westminster’s failure to acknowledge the timeline of causality constitutes gross negligence and undermines the lawfulness of the children’s removal. The WhatsApp chat is not “informal” — it is a formal timeline of institutional breach, and it will be submitted in every forum necessary to restore this family’s rights.

---

⚖️ Legal Rights & Archival Footer This Dispatch Has Been Formally Archived by SWANK London Ltd. Every entry is timestamped. Every sentence is jurisdictional. Every structure is protected. This document does not contain confidential family court material. It contains the lawful submissions, filings, and lived experiences of a party to multiple legal proceedings — including civil claims, safeguarding audits, and formal complaints. All references to professionals are strictly in their public roles and relate to conduct already raised in litigation. This is not a breach of privacy. It is the preservation of truth. Protected under Article 10 of the ECHR, Section 12 of the Human Rights Act, and all applicable rights to freedom of expression, legal self-representation, and public interest disclosure. 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. It is a legal-aesthetic instrument. Filed with velvet contempt. Preserved for future litigation. Because evidence deserves elegance, retaliation deserves an archive, and writing is how I survive this pain. Attempts to silence or intimidate this author will be documented and filed in accordance with SWANK protocols. © 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.

Chromatic v. RBKC: Housing Complaint No. 12060761 and the Architecture of Disbelief

---

⟡ Gaslight, Gatekeep, Get Infected: Housing Complaint No. 12060761 and the Chronic Absence of Environmental Governance at RBKC ⟡

A Multi-Agency Email to All the People Who Still Can’t Explain Why the Toilet Smells Like Industrial Retaliation

---

Filed: 14 February 2024

Reference Code: RBKC-ENVHOUSING-2024-TOXIC-FAILURE
Court File Name: 2024-02-14_HousingComplaint_12060761_5_Fwd_ResponseToKevinThompson.pdf
Summary: A layered escalation by Polly Chromatic, tracing three tiers of housing and medical complaint through a forwarded email chain, sent to every entity that has ever failed to fix the air, the flat, or the record.

---

I. What Happened

On 14 February 2024, Polly Chromatic submitted a formally furious housing complaint to Kevin Thompson of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, escalating Reference 12060761. The complaint was also sent — in one elegant digital sweep — to:

• Environmental Health

• The Housing Ombudsman

• Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Trust

• Chelsea and Westminster NHS Trust

• RBKC Complaints Team

• Samira Issa, Family Services

• Glen Peache

• Eric Wedge-Bull

• The Environment Agency

Why? Because all had participated — actively or passively — in ignoring, gaslighting, or retaliating against Polly Chromatic whenever she raised concerns about housing-based environmental illness affecting her children and herself.

---

II. What the Email Establishes

• That despite multiple referrals and documented health effects, no agency had provided resolution, repairs, or safe placement.

• That Polly has had to re-explain her medically and legally significant complaint dozens of times, without lawful accommodation.

• That the institutional response to her raising environmental concerns has consistently been deflection, delay, or surveillance.

• That multi-agency misconduct now amounts to environmental discrimination by administrative fatigue.

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because a mother should not have to CC ten people to ask why her lungs burn and her children’s noses bleed.

Because when the toilet is leaking toxins and the authorities leak liability, we file the record where neither can hide.

Because Polly Chromatic does not have time to re-explain the symptoms caused by state-owned air — she is too busy filing you.

Because environmental illness is not a metaphor. It is a claim.
And this is now part of the Retaliation Timeline.

---

IV. Violations

• Environmental Protection Act 1990 – Failure to respond to statutory nuisance

• Housing Act 2004 – Unresolved hazards, failure to comply with fitness standards

• Equality Act 2010 – Discrimination via failure to accommodate disability-related environmental harm

• Children Act 1989 – Risk to child welfare through known housing-related medical hazard

• Human Rights Act 1998 – Breach of Article 8 (Right to Private and Family Life)

---

V. SWANK’s Position

This is not just a housing complaint — it is a forensic exhibit in the borough’s long history of institutional decay and medical deflection.

Every time Polly Chromatic contacts the authorities, she is ignored — until retaliation arrives instead of repair.

This file proves the pattern:
Speak up → Get surveilled.
Complain → Get ignored.
Persist → Get punished.

But now, we archive.
And RBKC can’t redact the iCloud trail.

---

⟡ SWANK London Ltd. Evidentiary Archive
Downloaded via www.swanklondon.com
Not edited. Not deleted. Only documented.

---

⟡ 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.

Respiratory Harm by Design: Sewer Gas, Safeguarding Theatre, and the Failure to Protect Disabled Families

---

🤍 SWANK London Ltd.

✒️ Dispatch No. UKHSA-0625-Sewer-Air

Filed Under: Respiratory Negligence, Housing Decay, Public Health Dereliction

---

To:
UK Health Security Agency
Public Health Directorate

From:
Polly Chromatic
Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens
London W2 6JL
📧 director@swanklondon.com
🌐 www.swanklondon.com

Date: June 2025

Subject:
Formal Complaint – Sewer Gas Exposure, Respiratory Harm, and Institutional Failure to Protect a Medically Vulnerable Family

---

🩺 Public Health in Collapse: A Complaint

Dear Public Health Director,

This correspondence is submitted to report a sustained public health hazard and institutional negligence which, since 2023, has endangered the respiratory and psychological safety of myself and my four children — each medically documented as vulnerable.

I write not in desperation, but in precise remembrance.

I am a disabled mother, diagnosed with:

• Eosinophilic asthma

• Muscle tension dysphonia

• Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) — acquired through prolonged institutional contact

All four of my children have clinically recognised asthma. Despite these clear, codeable vulnerabilities, we have been exposed — repeatedly, preventably — to the following:

---

⚠️ Documented Environmental Hazards

• Persistent sewer gas leaks at Flat E, 37 Elgin Crescent, London W11 – acknowledged but unremedied by landlord and council

• Confirmed mould, airborne contaminants, and water-damage-induced reinfection – triggering respiratory crises, collapse, and loss of consciousness

• Unprotected home visits by social workers while the household was medically unwell – resulting in cross-infection and symptom escalation

• Denial of written communication adjustments, worsening conditions by enforcing unsafe verbal contact against medical advice

---

🧾 Public Health Failures Identified

1. Environmental Neglect
   Despite environmental reports and formal awareness, the housing authority permitted the continued occupation of an uninhabitable property by asthmatic children.

2. Medical Disregard
   NHS and GP services failed to document or respond to severe respiratory events — including wheezing, collapse, and airway distress.

3. Safeguarding Theatre
   Safeguarding was weaponised to deflect from environmental accountability. No infection control or protective accommodations were offered.

4. Medical Suppression
   Social services discouraged hospital attendance and retaliated when environmental hazards were raised through legal channels.

---

⚖️ Jurisdictional Scope of the UKHSA

This case exemplifies systemic breach in public health protection under the following domains:

• Indoor air quality oversight

• Cross-infection policy during state visitation

• Triage protocols for disabled and respiratory-compromised households

• Environmental safeguarding blind spots in local authority frameworks

The ongoing refusal to treat environmental illness as a legitimate clinical and safeguarding concern constitutes not only negligence — but policy-level endangerment.

---

🎯 Relief Sought

I request the UKHSA:

1. To investigate the conduct of relevant local authorities and NHS bodies in relation to respiratory hazard management

2. To issue national guidance on sewer gas and air-quality-related asthma in children

3. To review infection control protocols for state personnel entering medically vulnerable homes

4. To classify environmental safeguarding negligence as a matter of public health urgency

---

🗂 Documentation

All supporting evidence is archived at:
📂 www.swanklondon.com

This includes correspondence, medical records, environmental reports, and formal complaints already submitted to:

• Westminster Children’s Services

• NHS Trusts

• CQC

• Environmental Health

• PHSO

• United Nations Special Rapporteurs

---

🖋 Access Adjustment

Due to diagnosed disabilities, I am medically exempt from verbal engagement.
All communication must remain in writing.

---

Yours faithfully,
Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
📍 Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens, London W2
📧 director@swanklondon.com
🌐 www.swanklondon.com
⚠ Written Communication Only – View Statement

---

Discrimination and Housing Neglect: Westminster Council Obstructs Employment and Safe Living Conditions

---

⟡ “Apparently I’m Not Allowed to Work, Live, or Breathe”: Harassment, Mould, and the Bureaucratic Sabotage of Survival ⟡
When a disabled woman tries to work, social services deliver gas leaks and silence.

Filed: 12 June 2025
Reference: SWANK/WCC/DISCRIM-077
📎 Download PDF – 2024-12-14_SWANK_EMAIL_WCC_Discrimination-Housing-Obstruction.pdf
Email to Westminster City Council alleging housing-related discrimination and obstruction of employment through systemic harassment and unsafe accommodation.

---

I. What Happened
On 14 December 2024, Polly Chromatic emailed Westminster City Council officers Kirsty Hornal and Sarah Newman. Her message was succinct, furious, and irrefutably clear: she had been harassed, bullied, and obstructed by the very systems meant to safeguard her. Hospitals mistreated her. Social workers failed her. The Council, allegedly supporting her, created conditions under which employment — and survival — became impossible.

She stated plainly: she cannot live in mould-infested housing or in properties with sewer gas leaks. These are not preferences. They are public health mandates. She should be working — and would be — if not for the state-sanctioned sabotage that made her sick and destabilised her home.

The Council did not reply. The silence was deafening — and consistent.

---

II. What the Complaint Establishes

• Disability discrimination via environmental health neglect

• Constructive interference with the claimant’s ability to work

• Repeated exposure to uninhabitable housing conditions

• Obstruction of employment through systemic medical harassment

• Institutional complicity in a cycle of enforced dependency

This wasn’t accommodation. It was containment.

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because breathing is not optional.
Because no disabled person should be punished for attempting to work — or for refusing to live in rot and methane.
Because Westminster City Council has perfected the art of saying nothing while authorising everything.
Because systems that force sick women to choose between employment and oxygen are not just broken — they are engineered that way.

SWANK files this to ensure it is remembered — not as a grievance, but as evidence.

---

IV. SWANK’s Position
This was not a request. It was a warning.
This was not support. It was interference disguised as help.
This wasn’t housing. It was harm.
SWANK does not accept civic neglect recast as public service. Nor do we accept bureaucrats who install hazard, then blame the resident for being “too ill” to function.

We document every toxin, every non-response, every obstruction masquerading as policy.
When the system poisons your air, SWANK provides the oxygen.

---

⟡ 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.

You Ignored the Mould. You Reported the Mother.

---

⟡ The House That Made Us Sick — And the System That Blamed Us ⟡

Filed: 31 December 2023
Reference: SWANK/ELGIN/2023-CHRONOLOGY-DISREPAIR
📎 Download PDF — 2023-12-31_SWANK_ElginCrescent_HousingDisrepair_SafeguardingRetaliation_Chronology.pdf

---

I. This Is Not a Chronology. It Is a Medical Crime Scene Log.

This document details the cascading deterioration of health, housing, and state accountability at Elgin Crescent, where illness was not only ignored — it was converted into suspicion.

What it captures:

• Black mould

• Structural damp

• Children vomiting

• Disability worsening

• And a housing provider that did less than nothing

Until, of course, it wasn’t just inaction — it was retaliation.

---

II. A Timeline of Dignified Decay

This record shows:

• Repairs requested, ignored

• Medical letters submitted, dismissed

• Hospital admissions, reframed as instability

• Disrepair, reframed as neglect

What followed was not a response — it was a safeguarding probe.

The walls were rotting. So they investigated the mother.

---

III. When Housing Becomes a Trigger for Surveillance

Let the chronology show:

• The home was uninhabitable

• The council was warned repeatedly

• The parent complied with every requirement

• And the reward was a multi-agency safeguarding enquiry

No apology. No repairs.
Just an institutional side-eye, formalised in paperwork.

This is not housing failure.
This is public health weaponised as maternal suspicion.

---

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not believe that housing decay exempts councils from liability.
We do not consider safeguarding a valid response to illness.
We do not accept that disabled parents must prove their worth while coughing through fungal walls.

Let the record show:

• Every letter was sent

• Every hazard was logged

• Every refusal was medical

• And every escalation — was theirs

This document is not a complaint. It is an architectural autopsy.

---

---

---

£6.3 Million in Harm — Denied in Six Paragraphs

---

⟡ The Insurance Officer Who Rejected the Housing Act by Email ⟡

Filed: 13 March 2025
Annex to N1 Claim: RBKC v. Simlett (£6.3M)
📎 Download PDF — 2025-03-13_SWANK_N1Annex_RBKC_InsuranceDenial_GiuseppeMorrone_SewerGas_HousingActBreach.pdf

---

I. £6.3 Million in Harm — Denied in Six Paragraphs

This document records the precise moment RBKC's Insurance Department, via Giuseppe Morrone, declined liability for:

• Sewer gas exposure at 37 Elgin Crescent

• Prolonged housing disrepair and tenant harm

• Disability-based vulnerability

• Respiratory crises and environmental collapse

The response?
An elegant paragraph of bureaucratic stillness that managed to deny statute, medical record, and common decency all at once.

“We do not consider this to be a legal matter.”
— And thus, they made it one.

---

II. The Logic of Denial in Passive Voice

Morrone’s letter:

• Avoids the word “disability”

• Refers to environmental poisoning as “alleged odour”

• Suggests no action due to “third-party liability” complexity

• Fails to cite any legal grounds for the denial itself

It’s not just that he said no.
It’s that he said it like a man paid to believe nothing happened.

The air was toxic. The tone was neutral. The email — archived.

---

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because when the council’s insurer declines a formal hazard report, they are not protecting public funds — they are endorsing harm by silence.
Because “not our problem” is not a valid response to gas exposure and four minor children.
Because denial without investigation is evidentiary gold, and SWANK files it with pleasure.

Let the record show:

• The evidence was ignored

• The insurance review was cursory

• The Housing Act was effectively dismissed

• And SWANK — bound the whole refusal to your £6.3M claim

This isn’t indemnity.
It’s dereliction, formatted in legal stationery.

---

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not permit insurers to sidestep statutory duty via email template.
We do not accept that medical harm is “not covered.”
We do not redact the names of those who decline liability while children wheeze.

Let the record show:

The damage was reported.
The email arrived.
The law was ignored.
And SWANK — annexed it directly to the court.

This isn’t legal ambiguity.
It’s documented non-response — and it now carries a £6.3 million price tag.

---

---

---