Lawyers have complained to the Charity Commission about a leading homelessness charity for its work accompanying Home Office enforcement officials on patrols where some migrant rough sleepers were unlawfully arrested, detained and deported, the Guardian has learned. Many of these rough sleepers are claiming compensation from the Home Office.

The Public Interest Law Unit (Pilu) has lodged a complaint with the Charity Commission and the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) about the conduct of the homeless charity St Mungo’s when it accompanied Home Office immigration, compliance and enforcement (ICE) teams on these patrols until December. The complaint focuses on how St Mungo’s handled private and sensitive data about its migrant rough sleeper clients and the impact of the charity’s role on the unlawful arrest, detention and removal of some of these rough sleepers by the Home Office.

The complaint has been lodged as the scandal about the Home Office’s unlawful removal of migrant rough sleepers grows. The BBC has revealed that the government is to pay hundreds of thousands of pounds compensation to some of the migrant rough sleepers identified during such patrols. In the year to May 2017, 698 homeless EU nationals were targeted and removed from the country.

Pilu made the official complaints after a successful legal challenge against the Home Office policy of rounding up and deporting migrant rough sleepers last December. The Home Office argued that rough sleeping was an abuse of EU treaty rights, even though many of those who were rough sleeping were exercising treaty rights by working. The policy was halted after the high court ruled it to be unlawful and discriminatory.



An internal St Mungo’s document obtained by the Guardian, entitled Enforcement policy for EU and non-EU nationals not engaging with outreach team, states that if migrant rough sleepers did not agree to voluntarily return to their home countries within 12 weeks “then their names will be forwarded to the UKBA [United Kingdom Border Agency]”. The document adds: “These individuals’ details will be passed on to the ICE by the outreach team. Following this a joint shift will be agreed with outreach, ICE, Parks Police to target/tackle these individuals.”

A freedom of information (FoI) response to Pilu from Brent council, which contracts St Mungo’s to do outreach work with rough sleepers, states that “the role of the outreach worker is to only provide information to ICE on the location of clients who do not want to engage with reconnection”.

A Pilu spokesman said: “As evidence is continuing to emerge in the aftermath of the judicial review, we felt it was important to report St Mungo’s to the Information Commissioner’s Office as well as the Charity Commission. We are calling on the ICO and the Charity Commission to thoroughly investigate the extent and nature of communications and working relationships between St Mungo’s and the Home Office.”

Howard Sinclair, chief executive of St Mungo’s, said: “We question the accuracy of the FoI response from Brent. We haven’t heard from the information commissioner or the Charity Commission but will respond if they contact us.

“We take all complaints very seriously. Our policy is that we do not share information about individuals [with] the Home Office except when an individual has given their consent, or in situations where people are at significant risk to themselves or someone else. We think leaving a vulnerable person to die on the streets is unacceptable, which is why we work with various agencies to actively offer support to people away from the streets and on with their lives.”

A Brent council spokesperson said: “Our FoI response relied on information given to us by St Mungo’s. Since submitting this information, St Mungo’s has informed us that it was in fact incorrect. They have told us that they will be giving us the correct information as soon as possible.”

A Home Office spokeswoman said: “This government is determined to break the homelessness cycle. We have ceased all relevant investigation and action on the immigration status of EEA [European Economic Area] citizens because of rough sleeping. Complaints or claims for compensation will be considered on a case by case basis.”