⟡ “Sympathy Without Action Is Neglect With a Smile.” ⟡
Formal complaint to the Ombudsman documenting passive abuse by Kirsty Hornal through inaction, delay, and selective compassion
Filed: 5 April 2025
Reference: SWANK/WESTMINSTER/LGO-HORNAL-INACTION
📎 Download PDF – 2025-04-05_SWANK_LGOComplaint_KirstyHornal_PassiveNeglect.pdf
Ombudsman complaint citing systemic inaction and disability harm enabled by Kirsty Hornal’s failure to intervene despite awareness
I. What Happened
On 5 April 2025, Polly Chromatic submitted a formal complaint to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, targeting the passive neglect of Kirsty Hornal, a social worker within Westminster Children’s Services.
Though Hornal communicated with superficial empathy, she failed to implement any substantive protection or enforce legally mandated disability accommodations. She acknowledged harm, promised follow-ups, referenced NHS colleagues — and did nothing.
This inaction took place while Polly and her children were recovering from sewer gas poisoning, battling immunocompromising conditions, and attempting to homeschool under harassment.
II. What the Complaint Establishes
Procedural breaches: Refusal to enforce adjustments despite confirmed diagnosis and stated risk
Human impact: Panic attacks, respiratory deterioration, educational disruption, retraumatisation
Power dynamics: Institutional neglect hidden behind polite tone and performative concern
Institutional failure: Staff permitted to acknowledge harm without duty to stop it
Unacceptable conduct: Tolerating medical harm under the illusion of professionalism
III. Why SWANK Logged It
Because kind emails mean nothing if the harm continues.
Because silence in policy clothing is still silence.
Because Kirsty Hornal did not need to escalate to be abusive — she only had to do nothing while harm accrued.
Because this is what systemic discrimination often looks like: not malice, but inertia.
Not denial, but neglect.
Not shouting — just letting it happen.
This was the formal act of naming what the institution packaged as “support”: chronic inaction, dressed as care.
IV. Violations
Equality Act 2010, Sections 20 & 29 – failure to make or enforce reasonable adjustments
Children Act 1989, Section 17 – failure to protect welfare through inaction
Human Rights Act 1998, Article 8 – indirect violation of family life through unremedied harm
Ombudsman Standards, Duty of Service – failure to act on repeated, substantiated risk notifications
Social Work England Standards, 3.1, 5.1 – neglect of health needs, avoidable harm through omission
V. SWANK’s Position
We do not accept inaction as neutrality.
We do not accept performative kindness as compliance.
We do not accept that professionals may admit to harm — and still allow it.
This wasn’t miscommunication.
This was professional indifference.
This wasn’t benign neglect.
It was structured, delayed, and systemically enabled — and now, permanently documented.
⟡ 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.