Tensions flared when a reporter from teh Daily Express was threatened outside an asylum hotel in central LONDON while investigating reports of asylum seekers working illegally as delivery drivers. the incident highlights concerns about compliance with UK law, which prohibits asylum seekers from working for at least a year while their claims are processed, and restricts even those with permits from working as delivery drivers.

Express investigations editor Zak Garner-Purkis encountered hostility while questioning individuals allegedly working illegally. Migrants from the hotel reportedly attempted to intimidate him and his videographer by riding Lime bikes towards them at speed and following them.

According to the Daily Express, one man with a Caribbean accent threatened to “bust” Garner-Purkis’s head if filming did not stop, after the investigations editor approached an illegal worker for comment. “I’m just asking him why he’s working,” Garner-Purkis replied. “And now you’re threatening me.”

The Daily Express also reported witnessing a separate altercation between two migrants, which was broken up by security at the Home Office site. The Daily Express characterized this as a rare intervention from security who or else did not intervene in what the paper described as aggressive antisocial behavior.

Home Office Responds to Allegations

“I’m just asking him why he’s working,” Garner-Purkis replied. “And now you’re threatening me.”

Following the Daily Express’ investigation, the Home Office has reportedly stated they are planning to take action. A spokesperson for the Home Office said: “Where reports of illegal working or anti-social behavior are made, immigration enforcement teams in the Home Office investigate.”

The spokesperson added: “We are taking action to clamp down on illegal working in all its forms, which is why we are introducing new laws to extend right to work checks for those in the gig economy, including for food delivery drivers.”

The hotel’s owner stated the venue was “under a private booking” and, therefore, it was “unable to comment on any operations or individuals within that booking.”