By Esther Krakue, Daily Express Columnist
The High Court's ruling against The Bell Hotel in Epping is more than a local skirmish. It is the first crack in the rotten edifice of Britain's asylum system, and a warning shot to the Government that people have had enough. Someone, somewhere in Westminster, knew all along that using hotels as de facto hostels for asylum seekers was a breach of planning law, and yet it was foisted on communities regardless. Now the courts have confirmed what residents have been screaming for months: this was never lawful.
And let's be clear: The Bell Hotel is not some isolated case. Dozens of hotels up and down the country have cashed in on this racket. Once venues for weddings, conferences and Sunday roasts, they now pocket taxpayer cash while ordinary families watch their communities change overnight. It is a perfect illustration of profits before people, with hoteliers selling out their neighbours for Home Office contracts.
T
he Epping case, however, has cut through because of its sheer brazenness. A hotel earmarked for closure to asylum seekers in 2024 was, miraculously, resurrected once Labour came to power. When residents protested, overwhelmingly peacefully (though inevitably with a few ugly incidents at the margins), they were told to sit down and shut up. Instead, they kept going. And now, thanks to their persistence, they've won.
The reaction of the Home Office is almost beyond parody. In court, it argued that closing The Bell would "substantially interfere" with its statutory duty to house asylum seekers. It cited Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights, as though relocating a few dozen people were tantamount to torture. Officials even suggested the ruling could "act as an impetus for further violent protests" elsewhere. Translation: if locals realise they have power, they might actually start exercising it. Heaven forbid!
Meanwhile, councils that can barely keep the streetlights on somehow find funds to shower asylum seekers with perks. Birmingham, teetering on the brink of financial collapse, hiked council tax and slashed services for residents. Yet there's still money for asylum-related "support". Elsewhere, councils are offering beach hut discounts, gym memberships, and swimming passes. You couldn't make it up.
And if the sight of cash-strapped councils doling out freebies wasn't bad enough, ordinary Britons are now being directly evicted from their homes to make way for migrants. Section 21 notices are being handed to tenants, including veterans, because Serco, acting at the behest of the Home Office, is offering landlords long-term contracts at 20 to 30% above market rent to house asylum seekers. Families who have paid their rent on time for years are being turfed out so that illegal arrivals can be given priority.
You want to know why people are angry? This is why.
Then there is the crime. Data shows that at least 211 asylum hotel residents have been charged with crimes this year alone, including sex offences against children and violent assaults. That figure only covers a fraction of the hotels in use. Police, desperate not to "raise tensions", routinely fail to disclose immigration status when people are charged.
In Warwickshire, it took a councillor to reveal that two asylum seekers were charged with raping a 12-year-old girl. The police response? That secrecy was "good practice". Good for whom, exactly?
This isn't about demonising every migrant. It's about recognising that the system itself has become a magnet for abuse. Britain's asylum acceptance rate is among the highest in Europe; nearly half of all claims succeed first time, and 68% for those who arrive by small boat. Even those whose applications are rejected often remain here indefinitely. Is it any wonder people risk the Channel when Britain offers high approval rates, endless appeals, and the ability to work under the radar almost immediately?
France's own officials admit migrants choose Britain precisely because it is so easy to get work without papers. Contrast this with Germany and Denmark. Both countries faced surging asylum numbers and responded with real policies. Germany tightened benefits and border checks, leading to a dramatic fall in applications. Denmark has pursued what it calls a "Zero Refugee" policy, reducing asylum approvals to a 40-year low. The Danish immigration minister put it bluntly: If the left truly cares about the working class, it must have strict immigration controls, because it is workers, not the wealthy, who pay the price.
The Bell Hotel ruling matters because it proves that when ordinary people push back, they can win. Councils can no longer fob off residents with excuses about "statutory duties" or "constraints on accommodation". The reality is simple: migration is a choice. Housing asylum seekers in our towns is a choice. And every crime committed, every eviction, every community destabilised, is the direct result of those choices.
This is Government versus the People. Westminster versus Britain. And Britain will win.
You may also like
'I couldn't believe what neighbours said after planting flowers in garden'
What is Israel's E1 project? Long-frozen plan that will 'erase Palestine from the table'. What's next
Mumbai Hit-And-Run: Son Alleges Police Bias In Probe After 60-Year-Old Mother Dies In Bandra Accident
Five members of a family found dead in Hyderabad
Musk's Starlink courts luxury airlines to grow in-flight wi-fi business