⟡ She Didn’t Show Up. Then She Shrugged It Off. ⟡
When the safeguarding visit fails to happen — but the blame lands on the family anyway.
Filed: 9 January 2025
Reference: SWANK/WCC/EMAIL-11
📎 Download PDF – 2025-01-09_SWANK_Email_Kirsty_MissedVisit_ExcuseAndDismissal.pdf
An email exchange documenting that social worker Kirsty Hornal failed to attend a scheduled appointment, only to respond with flippant dismissal — despite prior notice, medical coordination, and legal vulnerability.
I. What Happened
The parent prepared for the visit.
Legal notices had been sent. Documentation was ready.
No one arrived.
Hours later, Kirsty Hornal replied — not with apology, not with explanation, but with bureaucratic banality.
No concern for the disruption. No regard for the trauma.
Just the institutional version of “oops.”
II. What the Email Establishes
That a scheduled safeguarding visit was missed without notice
That the parent made all reasonable preparations under duress
That Kirsty Hornal replied as if no disruption occurred
That there was no acknowledgment of disability, impact, or professional obligation
III. Why SWANK Filed It
Because when they ignore appointments, they’re “busy.”
But when you do, you’re “non-compliant.”
Because procedural negligence is not harmless — it’s destabilising.
And because missed visits become future allegations — unless you publish the record.
IV. Violations Identified
Professional Negligence in Safeguarding Scheduling
Failure to Provide Reasonable Notice of Non-Attendance
Emotional Harm via Institutional Disruption
Dismissal of Communication Needs and Medical Context
Use of Silence as Shield for Administrative Failure
V. SWANK’s Position
You don’t get to miss the appointment and still hold the power.
You don’t get to forget your calendar and then critique the parent’s conduct.
This wasn’t a no-show.
It was a warning — of how care becomes control when it’s only enforced one way.
⟡ 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.