🪞 WHEN DOCUMENTATION MAKES YOU SWEAT
🗂️ Metadata
Filed Date: 11 July 2025
Reference Code: SWK-STAT-0711-COURTDISTINCTION
PDF Filename: 2025-07-11_SWANK_Clarification_CourtNotTarget_LocalAuthorityIs.pdf
Summary: Public clarification on the purpose of SWANK London Ltd. — not to surveil the judiciary, but to expose the bureaucracies that forced it into being.
I. The Official Clarification
To whom it may concern — especially those who keep emailing me as if I work for you:
SWANK London Ltd. is not a Court record service.
It is an archive of your professional ineptitude.
The platform exists to document the administrative sloppiness, institutional gaslighting, negligent risk assessments, and retaliatory procedures deployed against disabled families like mine — not to comment on court outcomes.
I trust the Court to do its job.
I do not trust safeguarding professionals who can’t read oxygen charts, ignore medical correspondence, and fabricate thresholds from rumor and revenge.
So, let me help with your comprehension:
If you had done your job properly and responsibly, we wouldn’t have needed to escalate this to the Court.
But because you failed so badly, I’m now thankful the Court has stepped in to address your misconduct.
II. SWANK’s Jurisdictional Note
The archive is public because your failures were public.
The documentation exists because your departments still don’t.
If you wrestled capably, you would not have met SWANK.
Since you did not — we file everything.
We are not here to soothe your embarrassment.
We are here to preserve the record.
Filed by: Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
📍 Flat 37, 2 Porchester Gardens, London W2 6JL
🌐 www.swanklondon.com
📧 director@swanklondon.com
⟡ 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.