Newborn baby made homeless by Home Office in frenzy to clear asylum backlog | Immigration and asylum | The Guardian (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 1 month ago by fne8w2ah@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

2 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 2 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 15 points 1 month ago

A father with a newborn baby and a mother with two children are among the asylum seekers made homeless by the Home Office after it wrongly withdrew their claims, it can be revealed.

The families were ordered to leave their accommodation and had financial support cut off for failing to attend interviews that they had not received invitations for because of the Home Office’s own errors.

The department has been ordered to reconsider the cases after the asylum seekers won a legal challenge at the first-tier tribunal, alongside two men from Iraq and Sudan, while 13 similar cases are yet to be heard.

The claimants are among more than 14,000 asylum seekers who had claims withdrawn without consent during a frenzied drive to meet Rishi Sunak’s pledge that he would clear the “legacy backlog” by the end of 2023.

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 5 points 1 month ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:

Data obtained by the Observer under freedom of information laws shows the “implicit withdrawal” process, which removes the right to remain in the UK or receive housing and financial support, was used for one in six decisions made in the push – a dramatic rise on previous years.

Referring to the mother in the case, who is a 39-year-old woman from India, the judge said: “She is a lone parent of two children but no consideration was given to this by the Home Office when deciding to treat her asylum claim as withdrawn and directing her to vacate her accommodation with immediate effect.”

The court heard that although the woman lived at her authorised address, all letters regarding her asylum interview were returned to the Home Office as undelivered by Royal Mail, and it removed her claim from the system even after she informed officials they had not been received.

In a separate case, a 40-year-old asylum seeker from Hong Kong temporarily left his accommodation when his partner was due to give birth to their son, and did not receive his interview invitation until he returned and the date had passed.

Under Home Office policy, implicit withdrawal can be triggered for people deemed “non-compliant” with the asylum process, for reasons such as failing to attend interviews or return questionnaires, or leaving official accommodation.

Nelson said that official eviction letters wrongly claim that there is no right to appeal, despite the first-tier tribunal hearing numerous cases, meaning many people may not have attempted to challenge the decisions.

The original article contains 806 words, the summary contains 256 words. Saved 68%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2024

91 points (96.0% liked)

World News

38471 readers

2584 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.