New policy on Allocation of accommodationHome Office Restores Key Safeguards in Updated Accommodation Allocation Policy


The Home Office has updated its Allocation of Accommodation Policy following a successful legal challenge brought by Deighton Pierce Glynn on behalf of Freedom from Torture and the Helen Bamber Foundation.

The updated policy can be viewed here: Allocation of Accommodation Policy.

The changes restore the previous policy position contained in Version 10 of the guidance.

The policy states that this version is in place while the Home Office undertakes further consideration following litigation.  

The revised policy reintroduces important protections for individuals being assessed or treated by Freedom from Torture or the Helen Bamber Foundation, survivors of torture, rape and other serious forms of psychological, physical or sexual violence, and individuals with serious mental health conditions where there is a high risk of suicide, serious self-harm or risk to others.

As a result, these vulnerable groups are now expressly considered unsuitable for accommodation in former Ministry of Defence (ex-MoD) sites, on vessels, or for room-sharing with unrelated adults.

In addition, the Home Office has restored the previous approach to evidence provided by Freedom from Torture and the Helen Bamber Foundation. Evidence from these organisations must be treated as expert evidence and given significant weight when determining whether an individual falls within a protected cohort. Such evidence should not ordinarily be referred to the Home Office medical adviser.

The policy further provides that requests to move an individual from accommodation that Freedom from Torture or the Helen Bamber Foundation considers unsafe or unsuitable should be dealt with urgently on a case-by-case basis, with appropriate safeguarding considerations where there is evidence of a risk of harm.

The remainder of the accommodation suitability assessment framework remains unchanged and continues to apply to individuals who are not affected by these revisions.

Details of the legal challenge can be found here and here.