“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 Solicitor Ignored. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Solicitor Ignored. Show all posts

Even the Lawyer Was Ghosted.



⟡ “It’s 21 October. Where’s the Conference Date?” ⟡
A lawyer asks for the basics. Westminster delivers silence.

Filed: 21 October 2024
Reference: SWANK/WCC/EMAIL-28
📎 Download PDF – 2024-10-21_SWANK_Email_WCC_LawyerQueries_CPCDateNeglect_MissedActions.pdf
Lawyer Laura Savage politely requests routine updates: conference dates, contact attempts, basic action point follow-through. In return, she receives Westminster’s signature move — nothing. This email chain is not about drama. It’s about the absolute vacuum where professionalism should be.


I. What Happened

The child protection conference was supposed to be moved forward.
Weeks passed. No date was set.
One action item — contacting the father — remained unaddressed.
So the family’s solicitor followed up.

Her tone? Perfectly measured.
Her questions? Procedural.
The result? Bureaucratic ghosting and another notch in Westminster’s timeline of neglect.


II. What the Email Establishes

  • That by 21 October, no CPC review date had been communicated

  • That Westminster failed to confirm whether the CPC meeting would be moved

  • That contacting the father — a core action point — was still outstanding

  • That a solicitor had to prompt basic accountability across multiple professionals

  • That even lawyer inquiries are met with obstructive silence


III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because when you need a lawyer to confirm if a meeting exists,
your system isn’t functioning — it’s performing.
Because inaction is not neutral.
And because ignoring lawyers who ask polite questions
is how procedural misconduct learns to behave like policy.


IV. Violations Identified

  • Failure to Follow Through on Action Points from a CPC

  • Neglecting to Inform Parties of Meeting Status and Scheduling

  • Non-responsiveness to Legal Representatives Acting in Good Faith

  • Sustained Pattern of Procedural Evasion

  • Obstruction of Parental Clarity and Legal Due Process


V. SWANK’s Position

Westminster couldn’t answer simple questions.
Not even from a solicitor.
And while they’re “looking into it,”
the children wait.
The file grows.
And the silence gets louder.


⟡ 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.

Documented Obsessions