£2.1 Million for Systemic Harm: NHS Failure, Social Retaliation & the Empire of Inhumanity

---

🎩 DISPATCH No. 2025-05-05–ANNEX–NHS-CIVIL-CLAIM–TOTAL-FAILURE
Filed Under: Medical Negligence · Disability Abuse · Judicial Stonewalling · Institutional Retaliation
From: Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens, London W2
✉ director@swanklondon.com | 🌐 www.swanklondon.com
🗓 5 May 2025

---

🧾 ANNEX TO CIVIL CLAIM

CLAIMANT: Polly Chromatic 
DEFENDANTS:

• Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust

• Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

---

⚖️ Summary of Allegations: St Thomas’ Hospital (GSTT)

Incidents:

• A&E attendance in November 2023 and January 2024

Alleged Misconduct:

• 🚫 Denial of emergency asthma treatment

• 🧪 False accusations of intoxication and erratic behaviour — conflating disability symptoms with criminality

• 🎨 Racial profiling of family and assumptions of parental unfitness

• 🚨 Wrongful police involvement, safeguarding threats, and trauma inflicted on children

• 💔 Enduring psychological harm, procedural injustice, and reputational damage

Legal Breaches:

• Clinical Negligence

• Equality Act 2010 — Sections 19, 20, 21

• Human Rights Act 1998 — Articles 3, 6, 8

• Procedural Impropriety and Institutional Bias

Damages Claimed:

• Claimant: £500,000

• Four children: £400,000 each = £1,600,000
  💰 Total: £2,100,000

Interest Claimed:

• £154,301.44 as of 5 May 2025

• Statutory daily rate: £2,410.96 (County Courts Act 1984, s.69)

---

🧾 ANNEX TO CIVIL CLAIM

CLAIMANT: Polly Chromatic
DEFENDANT: Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Foundation Trust

Allegations:

• Repeated A&E visits in early 2024

• Staff dismissed life-threatening symptoms and ignored disability communication needs

• Safeguarding referrals made based on bias and misinformation

• Clinical judgement replaced by institutionalised suspicion

Legal Breaches:

• Clinical Negligence

• Equality Act 2010 — Sections 20, 21

• Human Rights Act 1998 — Articles 3, 8

• Violation of NHS Constitution

Damages Claimed:

• Claimant: £500,000

• Four children: £400,000 each = £1,600,000
  💰 Total: £2,100,000

Interest Claimed:

• £154,301.44 as of 5 May 2025

• Accrues daily at £2,410.96

---

📜 MASTER WITNESS STATEMENT

Polly Chromatic 
Statement of Truth – Submitted in support of N1 Civil Claim

---

I. ✈ Domestic Violence, Exile & Institutional Harassment

• Fled Turks & Caicos in 2015 after severe domestic abuse

• Sought asylum in London; met by Camden Council hostility

• Camden escalated child protection without basis after disclosure

• Escaped while pregnant due to risk of baby removal at birth

• Returned in 2021 after further trauma and near-fatal asthma

---

II. 🏚 Housing & Medical Neglect

• Exposed to toxic sewer gas in Elgin Crescent (June–Oct 2023)

• Hospitalised in respiratory crisis at St Thomas’

• Accused of intoxication, refused care, verbally attacked in A&E

• Police invaded hotel room on son’s birthday, still untreated

---

III. 🧠 Social Services Retaliation & Disability Discrimination

• CPP escalation after forced verbal interaction while voiceless

• Westminster refused written-only adjustment requests

• Repeated illness followed from intrusion and non-accommodation

• Filing of N1 claim led to retaliatory PLO meeting, based on false allegations

---

IV. 🏫 Institutional Harassment by Schools, Councils & Hotels

• False reports by neighbour weaponised by schools

• Innocent bruises used to justify safeguarding escalation

• Hotel (Holiday Inn Kensington) issued noise complaints and police threats during medical crisis

• Forced displacements compounded trauma

---

V. ⚖ Judicial & Procedural Injustice

• Crown Court refuses to honour disability adjustment despite medical documentation (Dr. Rafiq)

• Continues to demand verbal contact

• Judicial review (N461) and injunction (N16A) now filed

---

VI. 💥 Relief Sought

• Acknowledgement of systemic harm

• Compensation for injuries (emotional, medical, procedural)

• Declaration of unlawful discrimination

• Injunctive protection from further institutional retaliation

---

Statement of Truth
I believe that the facts stated in this witness statement are true.
Signed: Polly Chromatic
Dated: 5 May 2025

---

The Abuse Was Real. The Records Are Not.

---

⟡ SWANK Supplemental Declaration to Counsel ⟡

A Forensic Dissection of Bureaucratic Amnesia
24 October 2020

She Remembered Everything They Forgot to Document

---

I. Opening Statement to Counsel

In a handwritten memorandum of facts, Polly Chromatic submitted to legal counsel a timeline the state dared not reconstruct—an evidentiary rebuttal to the court’s theatre of fiction. It included:

• Gross misconduct by social workers and police during a May 2017 raid

• The sexual assault of her sons by a female doctor, witnessed by nine adults

• The exclusion of her daughter, raising questions of gender-based targeting

• The laughable allegation of an “upstairs residence”—despite her living on the ground floor

The memory was intact. The receipts were precise. The state’s version was a bureaucratic ghost story.

---

II. Procedural Violations and Legal Incoherence

The state’s own confession:

“We do not have case records to confirm whether consent was sought or provided.”

Yet the medical examination occurred—under police escort.
With no consent.
On minor children.

Their fallback excuse?

“We couldn’t complete the investigation. The family had relocated.”

Correction:
The family relocated in November 2017, six months after the incident, due to neighbour harassment—not evasion.

The DSD had her number since 2016.
They simply never called.

---

III. Fabricated Timelines, Collapsed Logic

In 2018, DSD alleged they visited Polly at a home with no fence. No visit occurred. She was:

• Housebound by illness

• Never seen by social workers

• Never challenged in person about education—because no one came

Yet in the September 2020 court report, events were lifted from reality, relocated in time, and reassigned in meaning, to cover for their own procedural decay.

This is not miscommunication.
This is legal cosplay.

---

IV. On Homeschooling and Psychological Control

Polly stated it plainly:

“As long as my children are learning what they need to learn, they cannot dictate to me how to educate my children.”

Her pedagogy was digital, accelerated, and intentional. The Department’s critique was not educational—it was psychological retaliation.

A notebook check is not a curriculum review. It is a surveillance performance.
They accused her of isolation, while simultaneously demanding the children be kept indoors during school hours—denying the family’s lifestyle, rhythms, and cultural time.

“We get up at 4am and start school. We go to bed at 4pm.”

A truth too alien for a 9–5 imagination.

---

V. The Evidence They Can’t Handle

• The August 2019 visit – fully video recorded

• Psychological evaluation – already completed, ignored in filings

• Correct phone number – used by DSD repeatedly, yet court records listed a false one

This is not incompetence.
This is evidentiary sabotage.
This is strategic forgetting.

---

---

© SWANK London Ltd. All Patterns Reserved.
The record they erased is now preserved—stylised, footnoted, and devastating.

Polly Chromatic
Director, SWANK London Ltd.
Flat 22, 2 Periwinkle Gardens, London W2
www.swanklondon.com
✉ director@swanklondon.com
⚠ Written Communication Only – View Policy

---

We Need Your Permission to Investigate What You Already Told Us Happened

---

⟡ “We Cannot Investigate Without Your Signature — Even Though You Already Told Us Everything.” ⟡
NHS North West London ICB Requests Formal Consent to Proceed with Complaint Against Pembridge Villas Surgery

Filed: 27 May 2025
Reference: SWANK/NHS/FORM-01
📎 Download PDF – 2025-05-27_SWANK_Form_NHS-NWL-ICB_ConsentToProcess_PembridgeComplaint.pdf
Summary: NHS NWL ICB issues a consent form for access to personal medical records in relation to a formal complaint against Pembridge Villas Surgery, confirming that the investigation is pending consent.

---

I. What Happened

On 27 May 2025, NHS North West London Integrated Care Board (ICB) issued a formal consent form regarding a complaint filed against Pembridge Villas Surgery. The form requests permission to:

– Share the complaint with Pembridge Villas Surgery
– Access medical records
– Receive a response from Pembridge containing personal data
– Share information with NHS England

It also warns that failure to return the form within 14 days may result in suspension of the complaint.

---

II. What the Record Establishes

• NHS NWL ICB has opened a complaint file regarding misconduct or failure by Pembridge Villas Surgery
• Progression is now conditional on formal consent, even though prior written testimony was already submitted
• Medical records will be exchanged between local provider and commissioning bodies
• This marks a jurisdictional handoff into internal NHS governance and response chains
• The complaint's legitimacy is not questioned — only its process is delayed pending consent

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because bureaucracies often act as if filing the complaint wasn’t enough — your trauma must be re-authorised.
Because this document proves the system cannot ignore the claim — it must now ask permission to process its own failings.
Because requiring another form is not evidence of caution — it’s evidence of institutional self-protection.

SWANK logs every procedural checkpoint as proof that the system didn’t forget — it stalled.

---

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept that truth must be consented to twice.
We do not accept that institutional accountability should hinge on duplicate paperwork.
We do not accept that failing to process a complaint due to admin formality is ever neutral.

This wasn’t just a form. It was a stall disguised as protocol.
And SWANK will timestamp every time the system paused itself.

---

⟡ 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.

She Refused to Close the Curtain. We Filed the Light.

---

⟡ Nine Adults, Three Sons, and One Curtainless Examination ⟡

Filed: 8 November 2020
Reference: SWANK/TCI/2020-CTMC-FORCED-EXAMS
📎 Download PDF — 2020-11-08_SWANK_TCI_CockburnCTMC_MedicalMalpractice_ForcedChildExams_ABenjamin.pdf

---

I. They Called It Examination. We Called It Violation.

This complaint was filed after Dr. A. Benjamin of Cockburn Town Medical Centre allegedly performed:

• Forced physical exams on multiple children

• Without curtains

• Without parental consent

• With multiple unrelated adults present

• While the mother, a disabled foreign national, was ignored and intimidated

What began as a welfare check devolved into institutionalised medical trespass.

The children were not ill.
The doctor was not accountable.
And the parent — was documented.

---

II. A Timeline of Medical Horror in Plain Clothes

This record documents:

• The absence of written consent

• The presence of nine adults and a single minor patient

• The removal of clothing without procedural justification

• A doctor who refused to stop

• A hospital administrator who later claimed the incident "did not happen"

The complaint was submitted to the Ministry of Health.
It was never answered.

So SWANK answered for them.

---

III. The Secondary Violations

Beyond the trauma of the exams themselves:

• Medical records were withheld for months

• No safeguarding report was ever produced

• The hospital refused to confirm how many staff were in the room

• The experience caused lasting distress — for both the children and the mother

This was not a misstep.
It was a state-enabled bodily breach.

---

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not believe trauma must be televised to be real.
We do not require institutional permission to define violation.
We do not consider Caribbean neglect culturally exempt from accountability.

Let the record show:

• The complaint was written

• The names were preserved

• The trauma was real

• The file — is permanent

This is not defamation.
This is documented procedural violation with a SWANK header.

---

---

---

The Records Went Missing. The Harm Did Not.

---

⟡ SWANK Clinical Misconduct Archive – TCI ⟡
“They Called It Concern. Then They Examined My Children Without Consent.”
Filed: 8 November 2020
Reference: SWANK/TCI/CTMC-INTERHEALTH-MEDICAL-ABUSE-01
📎 Download PDF – 2020-11-08_SWANK_TCI_CTMC_InterHealth_MedicalMisconduct_Complaint.pdf
Author: Polly Chromatic

---

I. This Was Not a Clinical Encounter. It Was Institutional Harm With a Stethoscope.

Filed in November 2020, this complaint names Cockburn Town Medical Centre (CTMC) and InterHealth Canada in a coordinated act of medical misconduct against a disabled parent and her children.

At the centre of it:

• Non-consensual genital examinations

• Eight to nine adults present

• No safeguarding threshold met

• No paediatric emergency declared

• No written consent obtained

• And no clinical justification offered — other than vague “concern”

What happened in that room was not a misunderstanding.
It was institutional access disguised as assessment.

---

II. What the Complaint Documents

• Children examined without prior disclosure, without legal basis, and without medical context

• No paediatric specialist involved — despite the nature of the procedures

• Multiple staff present, observing, without necessity or explanation

• No documentation provided after the exam

• A complete refusal to release medical records following the event

• A consistent pattern of data concealment and narrative shaping, coordinated across state and hospital actors

This wasn’t safeguarding.
This was procedural theatre conducted on minors.

---

III. Why SWANK Logged It

Because medical consent is not optional when the state is involved.
Because child protection is not performed in silence and shame.
Because when a parent asks for records and is told “they don’t exist”,
— we file the refusal as evidence of its own misconduct.

We filed this because:

• Institutions used “concern” as access and record suppression as strategy

• The medical harm was not incidental — it was documented, denied, and repeated

• This event was a blueprint for future abuse — and SWANK archives blueprints

Let the record show:

There was no emergency.
There was no consent.
There was no explanation.
And now — there is no silence.

---

IV. SWANK’s Position

We do not accept “checking” children as a state-sponsored entitlement.
We do not accept eight professionals in a room pretending consent was implied.
We do not accept silence where trauma was caused.

Let the record show:

The state was watching.
The clinic was participating.
The mother was alert.
And SWANK — wrote it all down.

This wasn’t medicine.
It was colonial safeguarding with latex gloves.

---

⟡ 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.