The Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, a modest establishment just outside London, has become the latest epicenter of Britain’s ongoing and deeply fraught debate over asylum seeker accommodation. On August 19, 2025, a High Court judge ordered the removal of all asylum seekers from the hotel by September 12, following weeks of escalating protests and mounting political pressure. The ruling, which was sought by the Epping Forest District Council, has sent ripples through local communities, government agencies, and advocacy groups, all of whom are now grappling with the consequences—and the questions—left in its wake.
It all began when Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, a 41-year-old Ethiopian asylum seeker residing at the Bell Hotel, was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl. Kebatu has denied the allegations and is due to stand trial later this month. But the case quickly became more than a matter for the courts. According to Associated Press and Los Angeles Times, thousands of protesters gathered outside the hotel, some chanting "save our kids" and "send them home." What started as peaceful demonstrations soon turned violent, with at least nine people arrested as tempers flared and lines hardened between opposing camps. Local residents, far-right groups, and anti-racism demonstrators all clashed, and the hotel became a flashpoint for wider national anxieties.
Philip Coppel, a lawyer representing the Epping Forest District Council, argued in court that the hotel’s use as asylum accommodation had become a “feeding ground for unrest” and a source of dangerous community tension. In his words, "the presence of asylum-seekers at the hotel had created a feeding ground for unrest." The Council’s case also cited public safety concerns and claimed the hotel was in breach of planning laws, as it was no longer functioning as a traditional hotel. Judge Stephen Eyre, presiding over the case, granted an interim injunction, ordering the removal of the asylum seekers by mid-September.
The hotel’s owner, who stands to lose significant government-funded revenue, has announced plans to appeal the decision. The Home Office, which had attempted to intervene in support of the hotel owner, argued that moving the migrants would "substantially impact" its ability to provide accommodation for tens of thousands of asylum seekers across Britain. The judge, however, dismissed the Home Office’s motion, setting a precedent that could empower local councils to challenge central government decisions on asylum accommodation.
With roughly 140 migrants currently housed at the Bell Hotel, there is no clear plan for where they will go next. The Home Office has yet to confirm alternative arrangements, and, as reported by Infomigrants, government officials are still weighing whether to appeal the court’s ruling. This uncertainty has left many asylum seekers in limbo, with some reportedly facing threats and even physical attacks since the protests began. The NGO Care4Calais has highlighted that residents have had objects hurled at them and have been subjected to intimidation on the streets.
The situation in Epping is not occurring in a vacuum. Over the past year, the UK has seen a series of violent protests and riots linked to the use of hotels for housing asylum seekers. Last summer, misinformation linking migrants to the murder of three girls in Southport sparked days of rioting across more than two dozen towns in England and Northern Ireland, according to BBC and Reuters. Crowds attacked hotels, mosques, police stations, and a library. The violence, fueled by false claims that the perpetrator was a migrant who arrived by small boat, led to attacks on non-white residents and clashes with police.
Much of the current tension stems from the government’s policy of using hundreds of hotels across the country to house asylum seekers awaiting decisions on their applications. The practice, which began as a short-term response during the pandemic, has become a long-term reality. According to the Home Office and Oxford University’s Migration Observatory, more than 200 hotels are still in use, though the number of asylum seekers in hotels has dropped from 50,500 to 32,345 since Labour took office—a 15 percent decrease. Critics argue that the policy is costly, with millions spent from taxpayer funds, and that it turns hotels into community flashpoints, leaving migrants feeling targeted and unwelcome.
The political ramifications have been swift and wide-ranging. The court ruling in Epping has been seized upon by Nigel Farage and his right-wing Reform UK party, which is currently leading in national polls. Farage has called for similar injunctions and protests across the country, urging councils to “go to court to try and get the illegal immigrants out.” Several Reform-led councils, including Staffordshire and Northamptonshire, have already announced plans to pursue legal action following the Epping decision. Farage wrote in The Daily Telegraph that peaceful demonstrations could pressure local councils to act against the government’s migrant hotel policy.
Meanwhile, Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s Labour government faces mounting criticism from all sides. Despite introducing policies aimed at reducing migrant arrivals across the English Channel, the numbers continue to climb. Starmer is under scrutiny for failing to deliver on his campaign promise to bring down the number of migrants and to end the use of hotels for asylum seekers by 2029. The latest government data shows that, while the use of hotels has declined, the pace of change is not fast enough for many voters and political opponents. There are even whispers of a possible no-confidence vote in Parliament, though Labour’s mandate runs until 2029.
Advocacy groups and NGOs have called for a fundamental rethink of the government’s approach. Enver Solomon, chief executive of the UK Refugee Council, stated, "Ultimately, the only way to end hotel use for good is to resolve asylum applications quickly and accurately so people can either rebuild their lives here or return home with dignity." He urged the government to "partner with local councils to provide safe, cost-effective accommodation within communities." The Migration Observatory at Oxford University warns that demand for housing continues to outstrip supply, making a long-term solution elusive.
The events in Epping have laid bare the deep divisions and unresolved questions at the heart of Britain’s asylum policy. As the September 12 deadline approaches, the fate of the Bell Hotel’s residents remains uncertain, and the broader debate over how best to balance community concerns, public safety, and the rights of asylum seekers shows no sign of abating. For now, the eyes of the nation—and indeed, much of Europe—remain fixed on a quiet Essex town that has become a symbol of a much larger struggle.
