Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What are the living conditions like for migrants housed in hotels in the UK?
Executive summary
By mid-2025 roughly 32,000 people — about 30% of those receiving asylum support — were being housed in hotel rooms as “contingency” asylum accommodation, a sharp rise since 2020 driven by record arrivals and limited dispersal capacity [1] [2]. Reporting and NGO research describe a wide spectrum of hotel conditions: from overcrowding, infestations and poor food to examples of cramped but intact rooms — with cost, geographic concentration (notably London) and variation between hotels central to the story [3] [4] [2].
1. Rising reliance on hotels: why this matters
Since the pandemic the Home Office has increasingly used hotels as temporary contingency accommodation; at the end of Q1 2020 only 5% of asylum seekers were in contingency sites, rising to almost a third by March 2025, and London has had particularly high hotel reliance [2]. The scale matters because hotels were never designed as long-term social housing: their use has financial, logistical and wellbeing implications for residents and local services [2] [5].
2. What people living there report: overcrowding, infestations and food worries
NGO research based on interviews with hundreds of hotel residents documents repeated reports of overcrowding (including families of six in a single room), rodent and insect infestations, damp, stained mattresses and bad food — conditions that campaigners and charities say are widespread in some sites [3] [4]. Individual testimonials cited by The Independent and Ramfel paint a picture of low-quality, sometimes unsafe living environments [3] [4].
3. Variation across hotels: not all the same
News coverage and commentaries note significant variation between hotels: some sources and hotel managers emphasise cleaner, functional rooms, while investigative reporting and charity studies highlight worse examples and systemic issues such as shared facilities, overcrowding and hygiene failures [6] [4]. This variation means a single anecdote cannot represent the whole system; the available reporting shows both isolated better conditions and recurring serious problems [6] [4].
4. Health, safety and practical consequences
Reports mention health risks from poor food and people skipping meals to avoid illness, cooking in unsafe ways in rooms, and the mental strain of long stays in cramped spaces; some investigations also document long-term stays lasting years and births occurring while people are housed in hotels [7] [8]. These accounts tie to concerns over NHS access, continuity of care and the difficulty of attending appointments when people are moved long distances between hotels [8] [7].
5. Cost and policy tensions: expensive, temporary and politically fraught
Hotels cost substantially more than other asylum accommodation types; the Migration Observatory notes hotels have been far costlier, and government figures and reporting have highlighted millions a day in hotel bills — a driver for political pressure to end hotel use and explore alternatives like repurposed student housing or military sites [2] [9] [10]. Parties and ministers frame the cost either as an emergency necessity to meet legal obligations or as evidence of a failing, expensive system [5] [10].
6. Geography, concentration and community tensions
Certain regions host a disproportionate share of hotel placements; London remained an exception with high hotel usage and other localities have seen community friction, protests and political headlines about hotels being used as asylum sites [2] [11]. Local councils and residents express competing concerns — from housing shortages and service burdens to allegations and misinformation about conditions that can inflame tensions [11].
7. What the official record and oversight say
Parliamentary briefings and the House of Lords note hotels are used as a contingency to meet legal duties when other accommodation is unavailable; the government has expressed an ambition to end hotel use by the end of the current Parliament but has not fixed a timetable and has explored alternatives [5] [10]. Independent trackers and library briefings show the number of hotels and people in them remain substantial, and external scrutiny (media and NGOs) has repeatedly flagged problems [10] [1].
8. How to read the reporting: strengths and limits of current coverage
Investigations from charities and the press provide consistent testimony about severe problems in many hotels [3] [4], but some commentators and a few reports argue that conditions vary and extreme cases are sometimes amplified by media [6]. Available sources do not mention a comprehensive, government-published inspection dataset that covers every hotel room; instead we have aggregated counts, NGO fieldwork and selective media access that together give a credible but partial picture [2] [3] [6].
9. Bottom line for readers
The balance of reporting and NGO evidence indicates many migrants in UK hotels face overcrowded, unhygienic and inadequate conditions in a system meant to be temporary, while other hotels are less dire — but the system’s scale, concentrated geography and high cost make reform politically urgent and socially consequential [3] [4] [2]. Policymakers cite legal obligations and emergency pressures for the status quo, while critics demand faster moves to cheaper, more suitable long-term accommodation [5] [10].