Nearly 42,000 UK asylum seekers waiting on appeal
Almost 42,000 asylum seekers are waiting for an appeal hearing after the Home Office rejected their initial claims, according to analysis of official figures.The Refugee Council said the number is a five-fold increase in two years and the government risks simply moving the asylum crisis from one part of the system to another, with almost 40,000 migrants still housed in hotels.The Home Office said it had doubled the number of asylum seekers receiving an initial decision on their claim and allocated funding for more sitting court days.A spokesperson said the government remains determined to end the use of asylum hotels over time and cut the "unacceptably high" costs of accommodation.
The Refugee Council said more asylum seekers' claims are being refused due to legislation introduced by the previous Conservative government, which made it harder to prove genuine refugee status.After the government enacted the Nationality and Borders Act, only four in 10 Afghans were given permission to stay in the second half of last year. Previously, almost all Afghans asking for sanctuary were granted asylum.Many of those rejected are thought likely to be appealing the decision. Currently, Afghans make up the highest nationality accommodated in hotels and those arriving by small boats in the last two years.The chief executive of the Refugee Council, Enver Solomon, has called for better and fairer decision making. "Right first-time decision making will ensure refugees are given safety to go on to contribute to communities across the country and those who don't have a right to stay in the UK are removed with dignity and respect," he said.The charity points out that those in the appeals backlog still require accommodation and warns that, without improvements, the potential cost of hotels could be £1.5bn this year.A government spokesperson said: "The asylum system we inherited was not fit for purpose, which is why we are taking urgent action to restart asylum processing and clear the backlog of cases, which will save the taxpayer an estimated £4 billion over the next two years."It is allocating funding for "thousands more sitting days in the Immigration and Asylum Chamber to streamline asylum claims and improve productivity," the statement added.Statistics from the Ministry of Justice show that at the end of 2024 there were 41,987 asylum appeals in the court's backlog, up from 7,173 at the start of 2023. The Refugee Council's analysis suggests the total number of asylum application appeals lodged last year was a 71% increase on 2023.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Undercover Mail investigation exposes how crooked businesses are pocketing tens of thousands of pounds by illegally using skilled worker visas to get cheap labour for barbers, convenience stores and warehouses
Corrupt immigration advisers are helping illegal workers dupe the Home Office in a cash for visas scam, a Mail investigation has found. They are charging up to £22,000 per person to provide 'skilled' jobs in the UK for under-qualified foreign workers. It comes amid concern skilled worker visa routes could be hiding an immigration scandal 'worse than the small boats crisis'. Critics claim it could render Sir Keir Starmer 's immigration crackdown pointless after he made new restrictions on skilled visas a major tool in ending the economy's reliance on cheap overseas labour. The ruse has proved so lucrative that many companies have started up just to profit from hiring foreign staff – then shut down after a year, having extorted migrants and exploited them for cheap labour. The scam involves businesses telling the Home Office they can't find the right people in the UK and therefore need special 'sponsorship' licences to recruit workers from abroad. Immigration advisers then coach immigrants how to lie to officials, overstating their levels of education and experience to secure the visa. One adviser – a partner in a government-regulated advice firm – was secretly filmed admitting taking hefty bungs to teach foreigners how to fraudulently apply. Leicester-based Joe Estibeiro, the managing partner of an immigration advice firm, told the Mail's undercover reporter how he: Tricks the Home Office into believing employers need a certificate of sponsorship to take on overseas workers. Organises firms to advertise the positions in the UK. Helps employ immigrant workers who will officially earn about £3,000 a month to meet minimum salary requirements for the visas – but in reality they will receive only about £900 a month as they will have to hand the rest back to their boss. Secures the visas for applicants with little or only high school education in their home countries. Mr Estibeiro even claimed the Government didn't care if companies bring in unqualified staff on skilled worker visas, insisting: 'The Home Office is just interested in the money.' The foreign staff he helps recruit have to pay illegal work finder fees of between £19,000 to £22,000 to their new employer for the job and visa, with Mr Estibeiro pocketing a large commission. They then have to work 60 hours a week and, in real terms, will earn far below the minimum wage, in some cases with a take-home pay of less than £4 an hour. Mr Estibeiro, managing partner of immigration advisers Flyover International, said he works with businesses in Bradford, Leicester, Northampton and Peterborough. Incredibly, his Leicester headquarters overlooks the bureau of a Home Office affiliate where UK visa applications are processed. A long-serving recruiter for a small Hertfordshire domiciliary care company said there has been widespread abuse in the overseas recruitment of supposedly skilled workers. 'It's all gone absolutely mad,' she said. 'I don't understand how so many people are getting into this country without any checks. The situation is making the small boats crisis seem like a minor problem.' Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said: 'These so-called immigration advisers and immigration lawyers appear very often to arrange immigration fraud. These people need to be identified.' Last night, border security minister Dame Angela Eagle said: 'We have immediately suspended this firm's sponsorship licence. 'Urgent investigations continue and if the allegations are true, they risk having their sponsor licence revoked and sponsored workers complicit in abuse could face their visas being cancelled.' The skilled worker visa scheme was introduced in December 2020 and in the first three years alone more than 931,000 visas were issued – far outpacing Home Office predictions of 360,000 for this period, according to the National Audit Office. Flyover International is regulated by the Immigration Advice Authority, but Mr Estibeiro is not a registered adviser. The firm specialises in international student recruitment. The firm is owned by another man who is understood to be investigating and said that Mr Estibeiro was not officially hired to work in the UK end of the business. Mr Estibeiro denied involvement in any 'illegal or unethical' activity and said he was 'solely involved in student recruitment'. He insisted he always told anyone who inquired about certificates of sponsorship for skilled worker visas that 'we do not deal with such matters'. The Immigration Advice Authority said: 'We recognise the seriousness of the issue and are working closely with the Home Office to determine the most appropriate course of action.' Dame Angela added: 'Since taking office there have been 40 per cent fewer visa applications, we have removed 24,000 people with no right to be here and arrests from illegal working raids are up 42 per cent.' Q&A How do UK companies hire overseas workers? Employers usually need a sponsor licence from the Home Office. This allows the firm to issue certificates of sponsorship for eligible overseas employees, which cost £525 per worker, to be paid to the Home Office. Employees use the certificates to obtain a UK skilled worker visa. Can firms or UK recruiters charge workers for sponsorship or jobs? No. Businesses are responsible for paying the sponsor licence fee and any associated administrative costs. The Home Office can revoke licences of businesses they find have recouped, or attempted to recoup, any part of the sponsor licence fee or associated administrative costs, by any means. It is also illegal for UK-based recruitment agencies to impose fees on individuals for the promise of securing employment opportunities. Is there a minimum salary for staff on skilled visas? Yes, though this varies depending on the role. For all routes, licensed businesses must ensure the role they are sponsoring the worker for complies with both the national minimum wage and the working time regulations. What are immigration legal advisers? Depending on their level, advisers can help with visa applications, obtaining leave to remain, nationality and citizenship and, at the highest level, represent clients at immigration tribunals. Advisers must be registered with the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner (OISC) which is tasked with ensuring they are competent and act in their clients' best interests. What rules do they have to follow? The OISC Code of Standards says immigration legal advisers 'must not knowingly or recklessly allow clients, the Commissioner, the Home Office, the courts and tribunals and/or third-party agencies to be misled', and 'not abuse any judicial and/or immigration process.' Migration fixer's brazen promise to undercover reporter posing as Indian student By Tom Kelly, Investigations Editor for The Daily Mail Tightening restrictions on skilled worker visas was a centrepiece of Sir Keir Starmer's much-vaunted crackdown on spiralling immigration. The Prime Minister has promised that new rules – demanding that applicants for the permits must be graduates – would help to 'lower net migration', provide a higher-calibre workforce and stop the UK becoming an 'island of strangers'. But a Mail investigation can reveal that managers of immigration advice firms are already using tricks that could render many of the planned changes pointless. During an extraordinary hour-long meeting, Joe Estibeiro, managing partner of the immigration adviser Flyover International, detailed to our undercover reporter how he makes a mockery of government rules despite his firm being officially 'approved by the Home Office'. Skilled worker visas were introduced in December 2020 to mitigate the impacts of Brexit on the labour market and supposedly attract high-quality employees to the UK. Businesses licensed by the Home Office can pay a £574 fee to the department to issue certificates of sponsorship for foreign workers seeking to come to Britain using the visas. Employers must ensure that immigration laws are properly upheld, including a minimum salary depending on the job. Bosses and employment agencies also cannot charge a fee to a work-seeker for finding them a job or pass on visa charges or other administrative costs to the migrant. But from the headquarters of the Leicester-based firm, which also has offices in Mumbai, Ahmedabad and Anand in Gujarat and works with 350 agents across India, Mr Estibeiro told how he arranges sponsorship licences for crooked businesses and then recruits staff for them – for a five-figure fee. From the headquarters of the Leicester-based firm, which also has offices in Mumbai, Ahmedabad and Anand in Gujarat and works with 350 agents across India, Mr Estibeiro (pictured) told how he arranges sponsorship licences for crooked businesses and then recruits staff for them – for a five-figure fee He told our reporter, who was posing as an Indian student wanting to stay in the UK after his study visa expires, that he could arrange a job for him shelf-stacking and running the till at convenience stores in either Peterborough or Northampton. The opportunity would cost the reporter £19,000, plus the annual health surcharge. There was also the chance to work in a role moving stock at a drinks warehouse in Yorkshire, but this was more expensive because the boss had got a 'bit greedy' after recently managing to hire some Pakistani staff, who he claimed had paid the warehouse boss £22,000 to secure similar roles, Mr Estibeiro explained. Most of the illegal fee goes to the employer, but Mr Estibeiro said he took 'a little bit of commission' of £1,500. 'So basically you pay me and then I pay the employer,' he said. 'We will handle everything. So that's all-inclusive. So including the visa – I'll do all the paperwork.' The initial £5,000 deposit to start the process could be paid by bank transfer, but not to his company otherwise the foreign worker might reveal he was charged for a job. 'We can't take it on Flyover. I'll give either my personal account [or] I'll give somebody else's, like one of my clients' personal accounts. 'See, there can't be a trail of it. Can't be a paper trail. 'That's why even when I am sponsoring someone, I will use somebody else to do it.' Further payments would need to be cash, he added. Mr Estibeiro told the reporter that for both jobs he would on paper receive an annual salary of £33,000, most of which he would have to repay to his new boss. 'Basically, because when we get a COS [certificate of sponsorship,] we have to show £33,000 per annum,' he said. Tax on this official salary would be deducted and paid to HMRC as PAYE and National Insurance, so it all appeared official. 'Everything is paid… he's gonna get a pension. He's going to get proper payslip.' After these deductions, this would mean the reporter would receive about £2,750 monthly paid into his account for the convenience store job, but he would have to hand all but £900 back. 'The owner will tell him that, OK, put it in this account, or, you know, withdraw cash and give it.' The worker would also receive accommodation – probably a shared room above the shop – and food from the store owners. In return he would have to work ten hours a day, six days a week in the shop. In real terms this meant he would almost certainly be earning under the minimum wage. But Mr Estibeiro said: 'Once you get your visa… then you're on the route to permanent residency.' Sponsored migrants were also allowed to bring spouses and partners to the UK, he said. 'Within a month, go to India, get married, bring her back over here and then she can apply [for sponsorship to work].' Mr Estibeiro said he charged £1,750 for arranging the sponsorship licence and recruiting staff for firms. His services included providing a 'good justification' to show the licence was required to ensure the application was approved. But he explained there were ways to trick the Home Office into falsely believing the company was unable to recruit staff for the required role from the UK. 'What I do with my client, one month before, two months before, we start advertising on Indeed and all those job sites. 'We'll get candidates for interview. So, the worst candidates, we will record a conversation. The good ones we'll say, let's not record it. 'So then, if the Home Office does an inquiry as to why, you say I interviewed seven candidates, and if they say we need a proof, you have the proof.' He said once the worker was in place with a visa there would be no further checks from the Home Office to make sure he really was a specialist. 'They want people to come over here, because what is there in UK apart from immigration? How does UK make their money? Immigration.' Despite it being called a skilled worker visa, he said no specialist skill was required to get a certificate of sponsorship. Chuckling, Mr Estibeiro described how when he had his hair cut at a barber shop he had arranged a sponsorship licence for it was a 'disaster', apparently because the staff were actually trainees. And he explained how he had hired an overseas worker with only a high school education by claiming she was a 'senior web developer'. They tricked the Home Office by telling the worker to enrol in a short web course costing around £200 in India so the worker knew what to say when interviewed by UK immigration officials. Laughing, he said the worker was 'not a web developer', had completed only high school education and hadn't obtained a degree. He said things were even easier for migrants already in Britain hoping to switch from expiring education visas to skilled worker visas. 'The good thing is, in UK right now, Home Office is not giving interview. So once you put an application, once you get it, that's it. They don't ask you for what… That's the employer's responsibility. The Home Office is just interested in the money you're getting.' He described how his phone rings 'non-stop' from 7am until midnight. The high volume of applicants meant sponsorship licences for skilled workers have become so popular in recent years that 'everybody' was opening businesses just to make money out of the scheme – including himself. He said he had a restaurant which he opened 'only for immigration purpose'. 'So, you know, we'll get a sponsor licence. 'We'll sponsor, get their money and then tell one of them that, OK, you take over the business, sell the business to him. 'In a year, if we can make like, £30,000, £40,000. Why not?' 'This is how everybody got into this business of sponsor licence. The business was very good in 2024. A lot of people made a lot of money.' He even told a second undercover reporter at the meeting – who was posing as the Indian student's UK-based cousin – that he could organise a sponsorship licence for his fitness business so he could also charge overseas workers £20,000 for visas and jobs. Flyover International is based in a large centre a short drive from Mr Estibeiro's £300,000 four- bedroom semi-detached home in a smart suburb on the outskirts of the city. As the reporters left, he pointed across the concourse to an office of an official partner of the Home Office's UK Visas and Immigration section, where applicants to stay in the UK provide their biometrics and complete visa applications. The Home Office has launched an urgent investigation and suspended Flyover International's sponsorship licence. In the last six months of 2024, the Home Office revoked and suspended the highest total of skilled worker sponsor licences since records began in 2012. An Immigration Advice Authority spokesman told the Mail: 'We recognise the seriousness of the issue and are working closely with the Home Office to determine the most appropriate course of action.' Flyover International is owned by another man who is understood to be taking the matter seriously and investigating and says that Mr Estibeiro was not officially hired to work the UK end of the business. Mr Estibeiro denied involvement in any 'illegal or unethical' activity and said he was 'solely involved in student recruitment'. He insisted he always told anyone who inquired about certificates of sponsorship for skilled worker visas that 'we do not deal with such matters'.
Daily Mirror
4 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
Startling sum North missed out on for transport in 'decade of deceit'
Analysis by think-tank the IPPR found the North of England would have had an extra £140billion in transport cash if it was treated the same as London under the Tories The North of England would have had an extra £140billion of transport cash if it was treated the same as London under the Tories, damning figures show. New analysis reveals the Government spent £1,183 per person in the capital between 2010 and 2023 - compared to just £486 in the north. And it was even worse in the Midlands, where the figure was £455. Marcus Johns, senior research fellow at think-tank IPPR North - which crunched the numbers - said: 'Today's figures are concrete proof that promises made to the North over the last decade were hollow. It was a decade of deceit. "We are 124 years on from the end of Queen Victoria's reign – yet the North is still running on infrastructure built during her reign – while our transport chasm widens. This isn't London bashing - Londoners absolutely deserve investment. "But £1,182 per person for London and £486 for northerners? The numbers don't lie – this isn't right." The data shows £83billion of Government cash was spent on transport projects in the north since 1999/2000. The region with the lowest amount of investment over the period was the East Midlands with just £355 spent per person. Last week Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced a £15.6 billion package for mayoral authorities to use on public transport projects across the North and Midlands. This cash is expected to include funding to extend the metros in Tyne and Wear, Greater Manchester and the West Midlands. There will also be a renewed tram network in South Yorkshire and a new mass transit system in West Yorkshire. Labour's Local Transport Minister Simon Lightwood said: 'This report lays bare the way in which successive Conservative governments have short-changed areas outside of London and the south east, denying millions of people access to jobs, education and opportunity. ' Labour promised we would bring growth to every part of the country and we've put our money where our mouth is. As part of our Plan for Change we've announced more than £15 billion for local transport in England's city regions, delivering the biggest ever investment in buses, trams and local rail."
The Independent
9 hours ago
- The Independent
Rachel Reeves must do more than hope for the best when it comes to paying for Labour's spending
R achel Reeves has an unenviable task as she puts the final touches to the government -wide spending review she will unveil on Wednesday. It will be a defining moment for the Labour government as she sets out departmental spending limits up to the next general election. The headlines garnered in the run-up to the chancellor 's big day are misleading. We have been promised £15.6bn for local transport projects, mainly in the North and Midlands; £4.5bn a year for schools; £22.5bn a year for science and tech, and £187m to bring digital skills and AI learning into classrooms and communities. While all are worthy, the government is playing a rather cynical game. Some of its pre-announcements stem from the extra £113bn of capital spending for which Ms Reeves created room last October by sensibly changing her fiscal rules so investment projects do not count towards her target to balance revenue and spending by 2029-30. However, her determination to stick to her fiscal rules to prevent a wobble on the financial markets means that Wednesday's statement will impose a squeeze on day-to-day budgets. Although overall spending will rise by an average of 1.2 per cent a year on top of inflation, big increases for health and defence will mean real-terms cuts for other budgets, possibly including the Home Office (which funds the police), housing and local government. So there has been a bruising round of negotiations between the Treasury and ministers such as Angela Rayner, who is responsible for housing and councils, and Yvette Cooper, the home secretary. During a media round on Sunday, Peter Kyle, the science secretary, did not rule out real-terms cuts to the police and housing. While the squeeze will technically be less severe than the austerity over which George Osborne presided from 2010, the danger for Labour is that it will feel like austerity 2.0 for many voters. Labour backbenchers are well aware of this and, after the party's poor results in last month's local elections in England, have pushed ministers into a U-turn on Ms Reeves's disastrous decision to means-test the pensioners' winter fuel allowance and extracted a promise from Sir Keir Starmer of more measures to combat child poverty, possibly by easing the two-child limit on benefits. There could also be a tweak to the £5bn of cuts to disability and sickness benefits hurriedly announced in March. The government must prioritise the fight against child poverty; without intervention by ministers, it would rise significantly over the five-year parliament, which would be an indictment of Labour. Ms Reeves must find a way to make good her promise in her article for The Independent last week to ensure ' every young person can fulfil their potential '. Admittedly, that will not be easy, given all the conflicting pressures on her to spend more. Although Wednesday's statement will not be a Budget, Ms Reeves should do more than rattle off a list of spending commitments without making clear where the money will come from. There is already a risk of doing so on defence. The strategic defence review unveiled last week is based on the government's ambition to raise defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP in the next parliament but it has not yet allocated the funds to go beyond a rise from 2.3 per cent to 2.5 per cent by 2027. The UK will come under pressure to commit to 3.5 per cent at a Nato summit later this month. Ms Reeves should also provide clarity on which pensioners will receive winter fuel payments in the coming winter. The about-turn has been slow and messy, to the consternation of Labour MPs. In responding to such pressures, the chancellor and prime minister have cited the economy's 0.7 per cent growth in the first quarter of this year but there is no guarantee that will be maintained. They should not lose sight of the need to balance higher spending with genuine public sector reform. There will be a limit to how much can be achieved through 'efficiency savings'. The suspicion is that, in spending more on defence, winter fuel payments and child poverty, Sir Keir and Ms Reeves are willing the ends without providing the means. They should level with the public about how their sums will add up. For now, they may be tempted to adopt a Micawberish approach in the hope that the fiscal picture improves by Ms Reeves's second Budget in the autumn. Again, that is far from certain: more holes might be blown in her headroom against her rules by an uncertain global economic outlook in the age of Trump 2.0 and the Office for Budget Responsibility downgrading its optimistic forecasts for productivity growth. Unless she changed her rules to allow more borrowing, the chancellor would then have to implement tax rises or spending cuts or a combination of both. When things might get even worse, the chancellor needs more than a strategy of hoping for the best.
