“Though the Witch knew the Deep Magic, there is a magic deeper still which she did not know. Her knowledge goes back only to the dawn of time. But if she could have looked a little further back… she would have known that when a willing victim who had committed no treachery was killed in a traitor’s stead, the Table would crack and Death itself would start working backward.” - Aslan, C.S. Lewis, The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe
Showing posts with label RBKC incompetence. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RBKC incompetence. Show all posts

You Went to the Wrong Flat, Ignored the Right Email, and Blamed Me for Breathing.

 🖋 SWANK Dispatch | 13 February 2024

NO, SAMIRA. WE’RE IN A HOTEL. AND YES, I’VE SAID THIS TEN TIMES.

Filed Under: Medical Disregard, Housing Obsession, Written Refusal Ignored, RBKC Incompetence, Disability Rights, Legal and Educational Interference

📎 SUBJECT: Another Email. Another Boundary Breach.

By: Samira Issa
Observed By: Eric Wedge-Bull
Address Searched: Not the one listed
Respect for Disability Law: Missing entirely

“It is not logical to go to our old flat looking for us when I’ve sent you many emails in the past few days… stating that we are staying in a hotel temporarily.”

The fact that this needs to be said is already embarrassing.

Samira claimed to have read the emails. Then proceeded to do the one thing that revealed she hadn’t.

🧠 WHAT YOU COULD HAVE DONE:

  • Open the email

  • Read the part about the hotel

  • Respect the disability communication needs

  • Ask a question via email

Instead, you:

  • Showed up to an empty flat

  • Invented confusion

  • Blamed the mother

  • Wasted everyone's time

🩺 DISABILITY IS NOT A NEGOTIATION:

Noelle has:

  • Severe asthma

  • Panic disorder

  • Muscle tension dysphonia

  • A documented need for written-only communication

And yet—Samira writes as if verbal communication is an optional accessory to "real" safeguarding.

“It is not my fault if you or other humans cannot communicate effectively via written communication.”
💅 Correct.

📚 FOR THE RECORD:

  • Referral contents unclear

  • No incident at Westminster and Chelsea Hospital

  • Multiple false reports from community members

  • Children thriving, homeschooled, safe

  • Valentine’s Day: reserved for love, not harassment

  • Flat move in progress

And yet—social workers act as though motherhood itself is suspicious unless under surveillance.

⚖️ QUOTABLE CLARITY:

“I pride myself on efficiency.”
“You could have simply asked me your questions via email.”
“We are busy.”
“You continue to interrupt our personal, homeschool, and extracurricular activities…”
“Have you thought about how your actions are affecting my children?”

Apparently not. But we’ll remind them in court.

🏛 FUNDAMENTAL BRITISH VALUES, SINCE YOU SEEM TO HAVE FORGOTTEN:

  • Democracy

  • Rule of Law

  • Respect and Tolerance

  • Individual Liberty

You violate all four when you ignore disability law, presume incompetence, and weaponise "concern."

Noelle Meline
Lawful. Literate. Documented. Done.
📩 complaints@swankarchive.com

Labels: snobby, legal threat issued, disability law cited, Samira Issa, Eric Wedge-Bull, RBKC incompetence, safeguarding theatre, NHS collusion, repeat harassment, verbal coercion refusal, written-only enforcement, fundamental values violated

No comments:

If You Don’t Respect Written Communication, You Are Not Safeguarding. You’re Stalking.

 🖋 SWANK Dispatch | 9 February 2024

YOU’RE NOT “CHECKING IN”—YOU’RE LOOPING.
Also Titled: 

Filed Under: Repeat Referrals, Verbal Coercion, Disregard for Disability, RBKC Redundancy, Court-Evading Safeguarding, NHS Collusion

📎 SUBJECT: Referral from Chelsea & Westminster Hospital

Received by: Samira Issa & Eric Wedge-Bull
Rejected by: Common sense, basic chronology, and every previous reply

“I hope this email is received well.”
— Samira Issa, sending her fourth request for phone or in-person discussion on the same incident already addressed.

You hope it’s received well?

It won’t be.

It’s being received like this:
STOP.

🧾 Recap of Reality:

  • The “incident” occurred on 2 January 2024.

  • Referral already answered.

  • No new event. No new risk.

  • Court has been informed.

  • Mother has legal representation.

And still — here you are, again.

⚖️ The Legal Posture:

This is harassment.
This is institutional stalking.
This is retaliation for formal medical complaints.

Your department is not seeking clarity — you’re seeking control.

📞 What Samira asked:

“Would you be able to meet with me in person?”
“A verbal conversation would be beneficial…”

🫁 What the mother replied:

“I cannot breathe.”
“I have repeatedly stated that I cannot talk on the phone.”
“Nothing new has happened.”
“You need to contact the court.”
“Do not contact me again.”

And yet — you came back anyway.

✍️ Let Us Be Clear:

WE DO NOT DO “VERBAL CLARITY.”

We do recorded, time-stamped, documented refusal.

If you need information: Read the file.
If you need direction: Speak to the court.
If you need confirmation: Check the date.

❌ There is no unmet need.

❌ There is no safeguarding risk.

❌ There is no consent to verbal engagement.

But there is plenty of written evidence that you keep ignoring boundaries — even while claiming to “safeguard” them.

Noelle Meline
Already referred. Already replied. Already done.
📩 complaints@swankarchive.com

Labels: snobby, formal refusal, safeguarding harassment, verbal coercion, written-only mandate, social work stalking, NHS referral loop, Chelsea & Westminster collusion, RBKC incompetence, court avoidance tactics, asthmatic sovereignty

No comments:

Documented Obsessions