Naccom members accommodated record 4,434 refugees and migrants in 2024-25 but could not house another 3,450, reports The Guardian.

Thousands of refugees are facing a growing homelessness crisis, according to a network of more than 100 organisations across the UK who say homelessness has more than doubled among refugees in the last two years. Naccom, the national charity of 140 frontline refugee and migrant organisations, blames the increase on “near-constant government policy changes” and the introduction of eVisas, which some refugees have not been able to activate in order to access vital services and support.

Network members were approached by at least 3,450 refugees and other migrants in 2024-25 whom they were unable to accommodate. They say this figure is likely to be a significant underestimate of the true picture. Members accommodated 4,434 homeless people, more than in any previous year since their records began in 2013, providing 672,807 nights of accommodation. There were 829 people sleeping rough at the point of accessing services, significantly higher than the 2022-23 figure of 378. Among those who were housed, 2,008 were refugees, a 106% increase on 2022-23.

Bridget Young, the Naccom director, said: “Our survey findings paint a bleak picture of a continuing crisis with no end in sight. Successive governments have expanded the hostile environment through constant, reactive policy changes that make it easier for people to fall into destitution and homelessness and harder to find a way out. The survey period coincided with a terrifying summer of rioting organised by the far right and anti-immigration sentiment has continued to creep into mainstream politics, encapsulated by recent policy announcements that are set to increase homelessness and destitution further.”

In one recent case, Asylum Welcome, a refugee charity in Oxfordshire, was asked for accommodation support for 48 newly recognised refugees who had been evicted from asylum accommodation in a single month, with many left sleeping rough. For those the charity was unable to find accommodation for, it could offer only a sleeping bag. Some who have been sleeping rough faced assault and had their few belongings trashed by a few individuals supporting anti-immigrant protests, according to the charity.

In a separate development, a Home Office pilot that began in December 2024 extending the move-on period for new refugees from 28 days to 56 days, to give people more time to sort out alternative accommodation and find employment, ended in September, returning the move-on period to 28 days for single adults. According to an internal Home Office letter seen by the Guardian, more vulnerable groups including sick, disabled and elderly people will also have their move-on period reduced to 28 days by the end of this month.

There is no indication of any immediate change to this truncated move-on period, which NGOs have linked to the rise in street homelessness among refugees. “It is important that we take the necessary time to review this evidence before making any longer-term policy decisions,” the Home Office letter states. The policy has been challenged in the high court, with some orders being issued halting enforcement of the 28-day move-on period due to the risk of destitution, including in an emergency case in October.

A Home Office spokesperson said: “The 56-day move on period remains in place for all families and vulnerable individuals until the end of the year. We are working with local councils, NGOs and other stakeholders to ensure any necessary assistance is provided for those individuals who are granted refugee status. An independent evaluation of the pilot is still ongoing.”

Official statistics showed England’s homelessness emergency remained unchanged in 2024-25 as the wait goes on for the Labour government’s long-term strategy, reports the Big Issue.

The number of households experiencing homelessness largely stagnated during Labour’s first year in power, official statistics show, ahead of the government’s long-term strategy to tackle the issue. Government statistics revealed 360,050 households in England contacted local authorities for support with homelessness between April 2024 and March 2025, down 0.3% overall on 2023-24. Of these, 330,410 households were owed support to prevent or relieve homelessness, representing a 0.9% increase on the previous year. There was a 10% increase in the number of households contacting councils for support between 2022-23 and 2023-24 so the stats show Labour’s £1 billion investment in tackling homelessness and rough sleeping has slowed England’s homelessness crisis.

But homelessness organisations warned that stagnation does not represent progress and called on Labour to deliver its cross-government long-term homelessness strategy. The long-awaited strategy had been expected before the end of the year. Big Issue founder Lord John Bird said: “Homelessness remains stubbornly high. This government should be commended for the record investment spent on fire-fighting a homelessness crisis that spiralled under their predecessors, but it’s clearly going to take more clever thinking to drive down the number of people falling homeless in our nation.”

“All eyes now on the government to finally deliver a homelessness strategy which eases the pressures that are causing people to lose their homes in the first place. The tragedy of thousands suffering homelessness from the damage done by poverty is something that we could eliminate, if government seriously put resources into not allowing poverty to be all that you have at birth.”

A total of 147,870 households needed council support to prevent homelessness with almost 40% of those cases down to the end of a private rented tenancy. A landlord wishing to sell or re-let the property was the main reason why households faced eviction although the 21,920 households represented a 2.6% decrease on the previous year. The Labour government has introduced the Renters’ Rights Act to give tenants greater security and is set to ban section 21 ‘no fault’ evictions from May next year.

Nye Jones, head of campaigns at Generation Rent, said: “Our broken private renting system is the biggest cause of homelessness. But councils have no choice but to push people back into it, causing a revolving door of insecurity and misery. The Renters’ Rights Act banning section 21 evictions will help stem the tide from private renting into homelessness, but landlords will still be able to evict in order to sell the home. Meanwhile, new protections from being kicked out could become meaningless if sudden rent hikes cause us to be priced out instead.”

There was also a 10% increase in the number of households facing homelessness leaving accommodation provided by the Home Office for asylum support, rising to 3,820 households. Since September, the Home Office has cut the “move-on” period from 56 days to 28 days for new refugees. There was a 13.1% rise in households becoming homeless after leaving institutions such as hospital, prisons, or looked after child placements, reaching 10,860 households.

Emma Haddad, chief executive of St Mungo’s, said the government’s upcoming strategy will be “critical to addressing the root causes” of homelessness including the flow from institutions into homelessness. The year also saw a rise in the number of care leavers, aged 18 to 20, facing homelessness, increasing from 4,310 to 4,610 and representing more than one in 10 care leavers. It is particularly worrying that 600 of these young people faced homelessness straight after leaving a care placement, for example, from foster care or a children’s home. This is a clear indication of a failure of planning,” said Linda Briheim-Crookall, head of policy and practice development at Coram Voice.

A total of 132,410 households were in temporary accommodation across England as of June this year, including 172,420 children. The latest annual statistics showed 41,250 households were placed in temporary accommodation outside their local area as of March this year. They were most likely to be in nightly paid accommodation, such as hotels and B&Bs, with 26,520 households making up 64% of that total. Labour has pledged to focus on prevention to reduce homelessness. The autumn budget promised to slash child poverty through the end of the two-child limit on benefits from April next year. But the government opted to leave local housing allowance rates untouched despite pleas from homelessness charities and campaigners to ensure housing benefit reflects rising rents.

Homelessness minister Alison McGovern said: “Everyone deserves a roof over their head, yet these figures show too many people are at risk. We are tackling the worst forms of homelessness and figures show we are reducing the worst forms of temporary accommodation with on-going reductions in B&B use. Given that research found temporary accommodation was linked to the deaths of 74 children in the five years to 2024 it is vital we continue this work. That’s why our upcoming homelessness strategy will set out bold steps to prevent homelessness and provide lasting solutions. Alongside our record investment of over £1 billion and £39 billion for social and affordable housing, we are creating a system where homelessness happens less and ends faster.”

Sefton Council said it has a statutory duty to prevent and relieve homelessness and pointed to the shortage of single person accommodation, reports the Liverpool Echo.

Concerns about the purchase of a Southport hotel have been categorically dismissed by Sefton Council, which said it remains committed to tackling the misery of homelessness in the borough. The proposals for Sefton Council’s acquisition of the Salfordian Hotel were called in by Cllr Mike Sammon after he raised concerns about the future allocation of the apartments, and suggested the eligibility criteria include families.

Cllr Sammon’s objection came just a few weeks after the council’s cabinet had recommended the hotel purchase for approval, defining it as ‘valuable opportunity’ to increase its supply of temporary accommodation for people experiencing homelessness. The hotel has been owned by Salford City Council since the 1960s, but the local authority recently approached Sefton Council with an offer to sell the site. Salford Council were said to be keen for the property to remain in public ownership. If Sefton Council decides to proceed with the purchase, it would need to apply for all necessary planning approvals before completing the sale. If planning permission is required, the council confirmed it will apply to the Local Planning Authority, and commence a consultation process.

Last night in Bootle Town Hall (November 19), Cllr Sammon presented his reasons at a ‘Special Meeting’ of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee for Regeneration and Skills. He said: “This call in relates to the decision which states that The Salfordian will be used for single adults in priority groups. Families with children who are also a priority group have been excluded. What is missing from the report, and the FAQ, is a clear explanation for that reason and why families were excluded. When the council describes the building as suitable for small households, it naturally raises a question that has not yet been answered, why has the decision been restricted strictly to singles and couples without exploring whether some level of family provision could be included.”

Cllr Sammon continued: “Many residents have said they would feel more assured if there was some capacity for families. This site is directly opposite a popular family park and people naturally see it as the kind of location where some family use could work.”

Responding to the motion, Sefton Council’s cabinet member for communities and partnership, Cllr Liz Dowd said: “The local authority has a statutory obligation to prevent and relieve homelessness. In doing so, it also relieves the misery of homelessness and provides hope for the future. The purchase of The Salfordian really will support these aims.”

Cllr Dowd added: “I’m genuinely struggling to understand the reason for this call in. This council has such an advantageous opportunity to purchase a building to relieve homelessness and misery. It should be noted that 70% of those currently in temporary accommodation are single people, as I indicated in the Cabinet meeting on the second of October. These people are our family and friends, and I indicated the main reasons for homelessness. So why would we not do all we can to provide a safe and secure roof over somebody’s head?”

Sefton Council’s assistant director of people and communities, Mel Ormesher added to the debate: “The purchase of The Salfordian will assist the council in both increasing and improving its supply of temporary accommodation. The council is currently supporting around 270 households experiencing homelessness and with temporary accommodation. 70% of this demand is from single households and 30% from families, and at the time of reporting, that would break down roughly to 67 families and 207 individuals. It’s with individual accommodation, single person accommodation, that is really in short supply in Sefton, in both the social and private rented sectors.”

Ms Ormesher continued: “The purchase of The Salfordian provides the council with an opportunity to increase its supply of temporary accommodation in-house and within the borough. To note, [the rooms] are largely single rooms. A couple of them are double rooms. Therefore, in terms of talking about accommodation for families, notwithstanding the regulations around accommodation for families, those rooms would not really be considered suitable without significant regulation.”

The committee voted it was not concerned by the cabinet’s recommendation, and Sefton Council’s proposal to purchase The Salfordian will progress to the next stage.

Alicia was six months pregnant when she found herself homeless and standing in front of a derelict pub, reports the Metro.

Having recently lost her father, alongside her grief came the heartbreaking loss of the home they shared. With nowhere to go, the local authority put Alicia in a hostel, then transferred her to temporary accommodation – situated above the grotty London bar. Although it was meant to be a short-term solution for the mum-to-be, Alicia ended up spending two horrendous years in the damp, bed-bug-ridden flat, alongside her baby son Aeon.

Since then, the family have found themselves stuck in a vicious cycle of cramped, unsuitable, and unsafe temporary accommodation. It means that Aeon, now six, has spent the entirety of his young life classed as homeless, with Alicia tirelessly fighting for her family to have somewhere secure to call home since 2019. ‘I’ve been in survival mode for six years, and it’s had a huge impact on my wellbeing,’ Alicia, 39, tells Metro. ‘It’s also really affected my son. I just don’t want any of this done in vain.’

As tragic as their circumstances are, it’s sadly an all too familiar story with homelessness in England now at its highest levels since records began. Housing charity Shelter says there are 172,420 children currently homeless in temporary accommodation in this country. Meanwhile, a staggering 4.5 million children (nearly a third) are classed as living in poverty. These conditions have been fostered by housing shortages, with private landlords charging premiums for often shoddy and ill-kept accommodation.

With the average price of renting in London thought to be between £2,218 to £2,712, this perfect storm of negative factors has resulted in families being and forced to live in shoddy, vermin and mould-infested environments to avoid being pushed out on the streets. Recalling her first home above the pub in London, Alicia says: ’It was disgusting. There were so many issues with damp and bed bugs. It was no place for my son to grow up.’ The arrival of the Covid-19 pandemic and its subsequent lockdowns meant Alicia and Aeon were forced to live above the derelict building for longer than anticipated, with the global crisis resulting in Alicia’s battle for better housing effectively left forgotten.

While the local authorities admitted they ‘neglected’ their duties at the time, the second accommodation the pair were placed in wasn’t any better. ‘I had drug addicts next door, and there was always fighting and knife crime near us,’ Alicia remembers. ‘The final straw for me came when other residents nearly burned our house down while myself and my son slept inside.’

Now in their third temporary housing arrangement, a block of flats owned by a private landlord, Alicia is still finding her family plagued by issues. The most pressing are mould and mice infestations, which have resulted in Alicia and Aeon developing health problems and effectively has rendered their kitchen unusable. Aeon has even been forced to go into hospital due to ongoing ill-health. ‘My son has breathing issues because of all the damp,’ explains Alicia. ‘There are moments when he stops breathing at night. I feel like I’m getting bounced around, and you start to feel forgotten. We both have anxiety and keep our guards up. I’ve seen mice running all over the counters and I flinch whenever I hear a trap snap, as I have to deal with a dead mouse which has been decapitated with blood all over the floor.’

‘Every time I’m in the living room, I feel scared,’ adds Alicia. ‘I want to be able to go into the kitchen to make my son a nice Christmas dinner, but I don’t feel comfortable or safe in there. I don’t feel like I can be relaxed. I have ongoing PTSD and feel like I’m spending most of my time fighting the system.’

Alicia has repeatedly reached out to her private landlord to make basic fixes to their accommodation – but to no avail, leaving the mum feeling dismissed and ignored. ‘The mould is just painted over, or they’ll send a pest control man that puts poison down but doesn’t really fix the underlying causes’, she explains. ‘They’ve told me the mice are ‘coming through the window’, or fed me lines that seem dismissive. Instead of presents for my son, I am having to get mouse traps and mould remover – although I can’t reach a lot of the mould myself.’

The uncertainty around Alicia’s living arrangements has meant that each of Aeon’s Christmasses have been unpredictable and haphazard, rather than a magical time for the young boy. ‘When you’ve lived in three different places since 2019, it’s hard to build routines or feel at home,’ explains Alicia. ‘The constant stress and anxiety, as well as the physical health problems, has taken an emotional toll on myself and my son – who does not deserve this at all. It’s not just about having a roof over our head – it’s about my child’s wellbeing and ability to feel secure.’

Having reached out to the charity Shelter to get further support, an advisor helped Alicia to understand her legal rights and guided her through her options for securing safer, more suitable temporary accommodation. Now, as the nights get darker, she feels more confident that she can focus on making Christmas as special as she can for Aeon.

‘I try and create small traditions, and we use arts and crafts to make homemade decorations. I try and get things cosy with blankets and lighting candles, and hide really small gifts or surprises for Aeon to create fun memories for him,’ she says. ‘I just want something to be done, and thanks to Shelter, I’m now not afraid to use my voice to make this happen. I’m not asking for much; I just want a stable home where my son feels happy.’

Public Law Project’s latest report finds that the average universal credit sanction is hundreds of pounds more than a court fine imposed on a criminal, reports the Big Issue.

Universal credit sanctions are “higher and more severe” than the average criminal court fine, new research has revealed. Claimants lose 100% of their universal credit as a result of a sanction. Public Law Project’s new report found that this equated to a loss of £525 for a single claimant over the age of 25 sanctioned for the median length of time in May 2025. The average court fine issued to people who had been convicted of a crime was £283 in 2024, by comparison. Researchers at Public Law Project also argue that the sanction is likely to be “more damaging” than criminal court fines. While universal credit claimants lose 100% of their benefit, criminal court fines can often be paid in instalments.

The weekly sanction amount for a single universal credit claimant over the age of 25 is £91.70. In contrast, the recommended weekly instalment for a count fine for someone receiving benefits is £10. The government has said that sanctions should be used as a “last resort” and that there should be “safeguards to ensure vulnerable people are properly protected”. However, Public Law Project has found that sanctions are frequently applied for first-time ‘failures’. This includes in circumstances where something has happened which is out of the claimant’s control – such as a health emergency or when digital and language barriers have made it difficult to navigate the benefits system.

Caroline Selman, senior researcher at Public Law Project, said: “Government must be mindful of the experience and realities of individuals who face additional barriers to engaging with the system, including where people are digitally excluded, face language barriers or who are navigating an unfamiliar system, for example as a refugee. The solution is not to simply improve access to appeals or make tweaks to the safeguards that apply (although those things are also needed) – the current regime has been shown to fail on its own terms and should be revoked or failing that, fundamentally reformed.” Public Law Project found that more than four in five cases (86%) that were supported to appeal were decided in favour of the person sanctioned.

Claire Stern, deputy chief executive of Central England Law Centre said: “When 86% of appealed sanctions are overturned, the issue is not individual non-compliance – it is a system that penalises people for circumstances they cannot control, blocks access to justice and ignores the barriers they face. The government’s claim that sanctions operate as a last resort is wholly at odds with the lived reality of the people we support. Until this regime is revoked or fundamentally reformed, people will continue to experience avoidable hardship, worsening health, and prolonged exclusion from work. Meaningful change requires a system that understands people’s lives, not one that punishes them.” Sanctions have led to claimants needing to use food banks, incurring debt and suffering with their mental and physical health – which can lead to a reduced ability to search for and undertake work.

A DWP spokesperson said: “We’re determined to get more people into good, secure jobs. That’s why we are stepping up our plan to Get Britain Working with the most ambitious employment reforms in a generation, as well as modernising Jobcentres and providing tailored support through the Connect to Work programme. As we shift our focus from welfare to work, skills, and opportunities, it is right that there are obligations to engage with employment support, look for work and to take jobs when they are offered.”

However, Selman said that the Department for Work and Pensions’ (DWP) sanctions regime is “counterproductive – knocking people back and blocking their pathway to work rather than opening it up”. The average time for Central England Law Centre cases to reach a tribunal hearing was seven months. Selman claimed that “reimbursement of unlawful sanctions at that stage, does not adequately compensate for the harm caused by a period of extreme financial hardship already experienced”.

Public Law Project is recommending that the current sanction regime be entirely revoked or fundamentally reformed to ensure sanctions are only ever applied as a genuine last-resort measure, after a clear warning. Sanctions should also be less severe, it said. It also wants to see stronger safeguards to protect people, particularly for those who face additional barriers when engaging with the system, and for there to be a more accessible review and appeals process.

Researchers are additionally urging the government to take action to understand and be more transparent about who is impacted by universal credit policies, including sanctions and conditionality. Stern said: “Sanctions are stripping people of the security they need to live, let alone to move into work. Our casework shows the current regime is not only failing on its own terms but driving people into crisis through no fault of their own.”