The Immigration Act 2014 introduced into law the Government’s hostile environment first announced by Theresa May, when she was the Home Secretary, remarking at the time: "The aim is to create, here in Britain, a really hostile environment for illegal immigrants."
The policy is a set of administrative and legislative measures designed to make staying in the United Kingdom as difficult as possible for people who have no leave to remain.
Some of these measures in the so called hostile environment made it illegal for landlords to rent to any foreigner, for banks to allow a foreigner to open or have a bank account and/or for DVLA to let a foreigner have a UK driver’s licence, without proof of residence also known as leave to remain. You may think, that’s a good policy as it will reduce immigration and or cause foreigners with no entitlement to leave the UK.
This is indeed what the government thought would happen, but has it?
Little or no affect in discouraging illegal immigration
In the matter of R on the Application of the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants v Secretary of State for the Home Department. Case Number: CO/598/2018, the High Court considered a joint action brought by the Residential Landlords Association and JCWI (Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants) and concluded that there has been little or no affect in discouraging illegal immigration.
However, the Act has a further nasty sting in its tail. Many foreigners now experience discrimination when trying to legitimately rent accommodation. Due to a general shortage of rental accommodation available, landlords often have more than one applicant and thus a choice of who to rent to.
If faced with a UK citizen or EEA national versus choosing a foreign national despite the fact that they may have leave to remain, many landlords sometimes completely unintentionally choose the UK or EEA national thereby avoiding possibly breaking the law and being heavily fined. They would rather rent to someone outside the UK instead of the extra checks required, and the fact that limited leave may expire or will need to be renewed and then having to check again or struggle to evict tenants if their application fails. It’s simply a matter of avoiding later complications by rather choosing the UK or EEA National.
Many other individuals applied in time for an extension of their visa, but are waiting for months to get an outcome from UKVI, whilst suffering harassment from landlords demanding to see their new visa and despite attempts to explain the operation of Section 3C of the 1971 Immigration Act which extends their leave, rights and entitlements until a final decision is made, landlords fail to or refuse to accept such an explanation.
The downside and human tragedy that the system causes are often unnoticed, unreported and created an illegal underclass of foreign, mainly ethnic minority workers and their families who are highly vulnerable to exploitation and who have no access to the social and welfare safety net. In some cases it has caused homelessness of families of foreigners who have come to the UK for a variety of legitimate reasons. They work hard, pay their taxes and spend thousands in renewing their visa applications, yet get caught in the trap of this hostile policy and in some cases become homeless.
What is the Government's next step on immigration and human rights?
Fortunately, in a glimmer of hope to these individuals, the High Court in the above named case, issued a formal declaration that the hostile scheme is incompatible with the ban on discrimination and the right to a private and family, contained in art 14 and 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Now, its matter of waiting for the government’s response and next step.
For help and advice on immigration matters please contact Andre Minnaar or Melissa Southall on 0808 166 8827 or email them on: a.minnaar@sydneymitchell.co.uk, m.southall@sydneymitchell.co.uk
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
