On September 24, 2025, the UK government found itself at the center of a heated debate after a BBC investigation revealed that taxpayers are footing the bill for millions of pounds each year in taxi fares to transport asylum seekers, sometimes hundreds of miles, to medical appointments and other essential meetings. The Home Secretary, Shabana Mahmood, responded swiftly, ordering officials to urgently investigate the practice amid mounting public and political scrutiny.
The controversy erupted after the BBC reported cases of asylum seekers traveling as far as 250 miles for a doctor’s appointment, with individual taxi journeys costing the Home Office hundreds of pounds. One particularly striking example involved an asylum seeker, identified by the pseudonym Kadir, who took a 250-mile round trip for a knee check-up. According to Kadir, the journey cost the Home Office £600. As he told the BBC, “Should the Home Office give me the ticket for the train? This is the easy way – and they know they spend too much money. We know as well but we don’t have any choice. It’s crazy.”
For Kadir and many others, the choice wasn’t theirs to make. The BBC’s File on Four investigation found that asylum seekers are required to show proof of an upcoming appointment at their hotel’s reception desk. Once verified, a taxi is booked automatically—public transport or walking are not presented as options. The system is designed this way because, when migrants are moved between hotels, they often stay with the same NHS doctors, particularly for ongoing treatments or specialist referrals. This means that even after relocating, their appointments may be far from their current accommodations, necessitating long journeys.
The Home Office confirmed that the rates for these taxi services are set by contract and calculated on a per-person, per-mile basis, rather than by the taxi meter. However, when the BBC pressed for the total cost of these journeys via a Freedom of Information request, the Home Office admitted it did not keep figures on how much it spends on taxi travel for asylum seekers. This lack of transparency has only fueled further criticism.
Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden, speaking to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, acknowledged the public’s concern. “I’m not surprised that that was a feature that caught people’s eye, and the Home Office are looking at that and I think they should look at it. I think a lot of your listeners will quite rightly ask, why should people be taken around in taxis?” he said.
Behind the scenes, the system is operated by private contractors. Clearsprings Ready Homes, one of the Home Office’s main accommodation providers, reportedly paid nearly £350,000 a month for 6,000 taxi journeys with just one firm, according to The Sun. In the South and Wales, the transport company PTS-247 was contracted for migrant transport, charging £1.85 per mile for journeys exceeding 175 miles. Legal documents reveal that PTS-247 is currently suing Clearsprings for £2.75 million in unpaid invoices, while Clearsprings claims the company “has consistently failed to provide evidence of journeys it has taken.”
An ex-Serco manager, who oversaw five asylum hotels in the North West until last year, told The Sun that migrants used the taxi service almost daily, sometimes inventing appointments to get a lift into town or for nights out, with costs running into tens of thousands. These revelations have sparked outrage among critics, who argue the system is being abused and is unsustainable.
NHS professionals have also weighed in. Psychiatrist Valerie Lucas expressed her frustration, telling The Sun, “This is staggering incompetence. I have patients with schizophrenia who have waited two years for a diagnosis — £600 would have covered that session. I know patients who have died waiting. It shines a light on the system on its knees.”
Political figures from across the spectrum have not held back. Reform UK’s Dr David Bull criticized the perceived fast-track access for asylum seekers, stating, “If you live here and pay taxes it’s difficult to see a GP in the first instance. But asylum seekers seem to have fast-track access.” Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp accused the government of writing a “blank cheque for illegal immigration.”
Housing Minister Matthew Pennycook, speaking to the BBC, emphasized that asylum seekers are not “ordinary citizens just jumping on a bus,” but rather individuals whose claims are being processed, which is why they are in hotels in the first place. Still, he admitted, “It’s very questionable why such a long distance was travelled.” Pennycook also said the government must “go faster” in ending the use of asylum hotels, echoing a sentiment widely shared across the political divide.
The scale of the challenge is significant. At the end of June 2025, more than 32,000 asylum seekers were living in taxpayer-funded hotels, an 8% increase from the previous year. The number of asylum applications lodged in the year to June 2025 reached an all-time high of 111,084, up 14% from the year before, according to BBC reporting. The government has been under pressure to reduce reliance on hotels, which are described as a “slap in the face” for pensioners and others struggling to access NHS care.
In response to the growing furor, a Home Office spokesperson reiterated the government’s commitment to reforming the system. “The Home Secretary has asked the department to urgently look into the use of taxis to transfer asylum seekers,” the spokesperson said. “Hotels are not a long-term solution, which is why we have taken immediate action to end their use by identifying more suitable relocation sites, such as disused buildings and former military facilities. From over 400 asylum hotels open in summer 2023, there are now less than 210, and we want them all closed by the end of this Parliament. We expect all providers to uphold the highest standards in preserving the safety, security, and wellbeing of those in their care, ensuring these principles remain central to every decision made in their support.”
The debate over asylum seeker transport costs has also been colored by recent events. In September 2025, Ethiopian asylum seeker Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu was jailed for 12 months for sexual assaults, sparking nationwide protests, including at several asylum hotels. This incident has added urgency to calls for reform and intensified scrutiny of the entire asylum system.
As the Home Office’s urgent investigation unfolds, many are left asking whether the current approach is sustainable, fair, or even necessary. With the number of asylum seekers rising and public services under pressure, the government faces tough decisions about how best to balance compassion, cost, and public confidence. The outcome of this probe may well shape the future of asylum policy in the UK for years to come.
