18 Dec Home Secretary reaches interim agreement to disapply 28 day move-on period to avert imminent street homelessness following legal challenge brought by DPG clients
DPG clients brought judicial review proceedings challenging the Secretary of State for the Home Department’s decision to pause the 56-day move-on pilot for newly recognised refugees, with the consequence that the default 28-day eviction period was reinstated for all single adults; and other elements of the Home Office’s policy and practice concerning the move-on period.
Following a series of urgent cases brought by our clients seeking interim relief to prevent evictions, including one claim in which generic relief was sought on behalf of all newly recognised refugees affected by the pause, and shortly before the Court was due to rule on that application, the SSHD agreed that for individuals who are at imminent risk of street homelessness, she will disapply 28-day evictions.
This agreement means that until 16 January 2026, asylum accommodation and subsistence support will be extended for up to 56 days from the grant of leave to remain where an individual would otherwise be at imminent risk of street homelessness.
Background: the pilot, the pause, and its impact
In December 2024 the Defendant adopted a pilot project which extended the move on period for all newly recognised refugees to 56 days, with an independent evaluation to inform her policy thereafter (“the Pilot”). In July 2025, Dame Angela Eagle, the Minister of State for Border Security and Asylum, announced that the Pilot would be extended until the end of 2025 to allow further evidence to be gathered, stating: “I can tell you today that we’re going to extend that pilot to the end of the year so we can collect a bit more information about it.” However, on 26 August 2025, with just six days’ notice and without completion of the independent evaluation (due, at that stage, “later this summer” and still said to be “imminent”), the Pilot was “paused” save for certain exempt categories, with the consequence that the default 28-day move-on period was restored (“the Pause”).
The Pause triggered immediate concern from homelessness charities, refugee organisations and local authorities. More than 60 organisations, coordinated by NACCOM, wrote to the Defendant to express their extreme concern that the Pause would “increase homelessness and rough sleeping, cause individual harm, put pressure on local statutory and voluntary sector organisations, and undermine the government’s commitment to ending homelessness through a cross departmental strategy”.[1] Local authorities, including Islington Council, raised wrote to the Defendant stating as follows: “If the government reduces the move-on period to 28 days, the result in Islington will be more homelessness, less integration, and increased temporary accommodation costs. A rise in refugee homelessness would be disastrous at a time of nationwide anti-migrant protests. It risks fuelling far-right narratives about strains on public services and could put rough sleepers at even higher risk.”
NACCOM’s evidence highlighted that even under the 56-day pilot, refugees were often operating at the limits of the system; reverting to 28 days meant many would inevitably fall into what charities have long described as the “destitution gap”, becoming homeless despite taking all reasonable steps to move on. Frontline homelessness and refugee organisations reported being rapidly overwhelmed as increasing numbers of people faced eviction with no viable housing options.[2]
The legal challenges
With the support of frontline organisations and local authorities, clients did everything they could to secure accommodation and mainstream benefits within the shortened 28-day period. Despite these efforts, many remained at immediate risk of destitution through no fault of their own.
Against this backdrop, newly recognised refugees began challenging the lawfulness of the pause and the Home Secretary’s failure to extend support where individuals faced imminent street homelessness.
DPG, working closely with refugee and homelessness organisations, assisted around 40 newly recognised refugees to avoid street homelessness following the pause of the pilot. In six cases, urgent judicial review proceedings had to be issued to secure extensions of asylum support at the last moment, preventing individuals from being evicted onto the streets. In each of those cases, the Administrative Court granted urgent interim relief.
Following the series of urgent applications, in the sixth case, our client made an application for general relief, to prevent refugees being left street homeless following the reinstatement of the 28-day move-on period, which was listed before Chamberlain J. On 9 December 2025, Chamberlain J granted interim relief for our client and listed a hearing on the application for generic relief on 18 December 2025.
The Home Office position
The Home Secretary was set a truncated deadline to file her defence to the challenge of her pause of the pilot and refusal to extend support. The challenge and general relief application were listed urgently for the 18 December 2025. Shortly before that hearing, the SSHD agreed to extend support to anyone who would otherwise be at risk of street homelessness until 16 January 2026.
As a result, individuals at risk of homelessness can now request extensions of asylum accommodation and subsistence support, with the Home Office confirming that these extensions may be granted for up to 56 days from the grant of leave to remain. An estimate of around 3,000 people who would otherwise have been evicted during this period will now be granted extensions if they would otherwise face street homeless.
The wider legal challenge continues.
What to do now: requesting an extension
Requests for extensions can be made by individuals themselves, by local authorities, or by organisations acting on an individual’s behalf, subject to a signed letter of authority where appropriate.
A clear written account explaining why the individual would otherwise be evicted into street homelessness will be sufficient.
Requests should be sent to both:
- Migrant Help at coc@migranthelpuk.org and positivemoveon@migranthelpuk.org, and;
- The Home Office Reinstatements Team at reinstatements@homeoffice.gov.uk
Acknowledgments
We are deeply grateful to our clients for their trust and resilience in some of the most stressful and uncertain moments of their lives. Their courage in bringing these challenges has been central to securing protection not only for themselves, but for many others at risk of homelessness.
The claimants are represented by Ahmed Aydeed, Megan Smith, Ralitsa Peykova, Natalie Hawes, Sophie Broke and Megan Hovvels of DPG. DPG has instructed Laura Dubinsky KC and Daniel Clarke of Doughty Street Chambers (DSC), alongside Sian McGibbon of Landmark Chambers, in the lead claims. DPG is grateful to the wider counsel team (Michael Spencer, Catherine Meredith, Hannah Smith, Josh Jackson, Finnian Clarke and Cian Murphy, each led by Laura Dubinsky KC) and clerking team (Rachel Finch, Emily Norman, Joanna Ramsey) at DSC for their assistance in avoiding evictions for 38 further clients.
The legal team are acting upon referrals from multiple homelessness and refugee frontline charities, some of which have also supplied key witness evidence including Care4Calais, CARAS, Da’aro Youth Project, RAMFEL, NACCOM, Glass Door. Our clients are also hugely grateful to the vital role played by these frontline organisations including in identifying urgent cases and supporting affected individuals.
[1] https://naccom.org.uk/open-letter-over-60-organisations-write-to-the-government-urging-them-to-reverse-the-shortening-of-the-move-on-period/
[2] https://www.redcross.org.uk/about-us/what-we-do/we-speak-up-for-change/the-costs-of-destitution
The policy challenge has been covered extensively in the press, including;
Share this story
