“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 housing failure. Show all posts
Showing posts with label housing failure. Show all posts

This Isn’t a Leak. It’s a Lawsuit in Evidence Format.


⟡ Three Defendants, One Property, £6.3 Million in Respiratory Damages ⟡

Filed: 5 May 2025
Reference: SWANK/HSE/ELGIN-TRIAD
📎 Download PDF — 2025-05-05_SWANK_HSE_EvidenceBundle_ElginCrescent_ToxicExposure_Landlord_RBKC_ThamesWater_£6.3MClaim.pdf

I. This Isn’t a Leak. It’s a Lawsuit in Evidence Format.

This submission to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) consolidates evidence against:

  • The private landlord of 37 Elgin Crescent

  • RBKC Environmental Health

  • Thames Water Utilities Ltd

The complaint outlines:

  • Extended exposure to noxious gases

  • Ignored utility threats and air quality breaches

  • RBKC’s refusal to intervene despite medical documentation

  • Landlord and utility negligence during known disability crises

This wasn’t a pipe issue.
It was an orchestrated collapse in housing regulation and moral competence.

II. When the Property Becomes the Weapon

The bundle proves:

  • Failure to isolate toxic gas sources

  • Structural disrepair left uncorrected for over 20 months

  • RBKC’s withdrawal of formal support after medical evidence was submitted

  • Thames Water’s refusal to assist unless risk was “actively fatal”

One landlord.
One council.
One water utility.
All breached statutory duty — while a mother and her children suffocated in silence.

No help was sent.
SWANK sent the invoice.

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because air is not optional.
Because endangerment via inaction is still endangerment.
Because when three defendants behave as one — the evidence must respond in triplicate.

Let the record show:

  • The exposure was proven

  • The borough was complicit

  • The water company was indifferent

  • And the landlord was silent

SWANK filed on behalf of breath, record, and law.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept “managed decline” as housing strategy.
We do not consider “tenancy” a waiver of respiratory rights.
We do not believe that disabled children should be raised in environments medically indistinguishable from chemical warfare.

Let the record show:

They didn’t fix it.
They didn’t warn us.
They didn’t care.
And SWANK — filed for £6.3 million, with oxygen and exhibits attached.

This is not repairable.
It is historical, evidentiary, and pending court date.



No comments:

The Gas Was Real. So Was the Silence. We Filed the Evidence.


⟡ This Is Not a Leak. It’s a Verified Crime Scene. ⟡

Filed: May 2025
Reference: SWANK/HSE/ELGIN-EVIDENCE-BUNDLE
📎 Download PDF — 2025-05_SWANK_HSE_AttachmentsBundle_ElginCrescent_ToxicExposure_DisabilityEndangerment_VerifiedEvidence.pdf

I. The Gas Was Real. So Was the Silence. We Filed the Evidence.

This verified bundle of supporting attachments, submitted to the Health and Safety Executive, consolidates what others preferred to ignore:

  • Toxic exposure at 37 Elgin Crescent

  • Known risks to disabled residents — left unmitigated

  • Deliberate non-intervention by RBKC Environmental Health

  • Utility negligence from Thames Water

  • Landlord failure, legal breach, and silent indifference

The gas leak wasn’t hypothetical.
It was documented, ignored, and filed in multi-column exhibit index.

II. What They Refused to Investigate, We Annotated

Within this bundle:

  • Respiratory collapse timelines

  • Structural maps of unresolved hazard

  • Medical documentation confirming exacerbation of illness

  • Chronology of RBKC emails, unread or evaded

  • Internal contradictions between departments — now catalogued by PDF, not excuse

Their failure was cumulative.
Our evidence — symmetrical.

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because safety is not rhetorical.
Because “we’re looking into it” is not a statutory defence.
Because gas exposure in a known vulnerable household is not an oversight — it is a form of breathable cruelty.

Let the record show:

  • The fumes were real

  • The responses were performative

  • The negligence was cross-agency

  • And SWANK — bound it all for court and archive

This is not a dispute.
It is proof — formatted, footnoted, and pre-litigation ready.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not permit structural neglect to be hidden behind “ongoing investigation.”
We do not allow landlords to price human harm into their tenancies.
We do not redact silence when it causes damage.

Let the record show:

The gas came in.
The help didn’t.
The council waited.
And SWANK — filed everything they didn’t.

This isn’t repairable.
It’s indictable — and the attachments are verified.




No comments:

They Ignored the Tenancy. We Filed the Bundle.


⟡ The Attachments Chestertons Didn’t Want to Acknowledge ⟡

Filed: 19 May 2025
Reference: SWANK/ESTATE/CHESTERTONS-BUNDLE
📎 Download PDF — 2025-05-19_SWANK_Chestertons_Attachments_ElginCrescent_SewerGas_ManagementNeglect_EvidenceBundle.pdf

I. A Bundle of Silence, Sent Because They Wouldn’t Answer

This collection of documents was submitted to Chestertons in May 2025 as supporting evidence of:

  • Unremedied sewer gas exposure

  • Respiratory collapse involving minor children

  • Landlord failure now transferred to managing agents

  • Ignored requests for emergency action under health and disability law

It contains:

  • Medical evidence

  • Prior regulator filings

  • Legal letters

  • Silence — wrapped in legally actionable timestamps

This isn’t a bundle.
It’s an institutional autopsy — and Chestertons is now listed on the death certificate.

II. What We Sent. What They Pretended Not to Receive.

This evidence was:

  • Delivered with formal cover

  • Cited under disability, housing, and child welfare statutes

  • Aimed at preventing further harm

Chestertons:

  • Did not acknowledge it

  • Did not respond

  • Did not act

They assumed property control.
They ignored the archive.
And SWANK — escalated it.

III. Why SWANK Filed It

Because ignoring attachments doesn’t make the evidence disappear.
Because silence from managing agents is not policy — it’s permission for harm.
Because when tenants are medically collapsing and the file is ignored, the agent becomes the defendant-in-waiting.

Let the record show:

  • We contacted

  • We documented

  • They declined

  • And SWANK — filed the bundle for tribunal, archive, and press

This isn’t post-tenancy paperwork.
It’s residency-level exposure, legally indexed.

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not permit agencies to inherit neglect and claim amnesia.
We do not accept procedural non-response when medical documents are attached.
We do not allow “management” to be confused with elegant avoidance.

Let the record show:

The file was sent.
The gas was known.
The duty was ignored.
And SWANK — published the entire refusal.

This isn’t supportive.
It’s evidentiary voltage — and we plugged it in.




No comments:

Documented Obsessions