THE cost of trying to close the Bell Hotel as accommodation for asylum seekers has risen to £860,000 reports the Local Democracy Reporter.
It means the cost to Epping Forest District Council in its legal fight to stop the hotel being used as asylum-seeker accommodation has increased by around £300,000 from the last update in February.
The strategic director and chief financial officer said at a Epping Forest District Council meeting on Monday (June 1): “The figure quoted as £860,000 includes estimates of the full cost, although there are some costs that still need to be finally determined. So that is our newest estimate of the full costs at the moment.”
The hotel became the focal point of protests last summer after a resident was charged and later convicted of sexual assault against a woman and a teenage girl.
Ethiopian national Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu was sentenced to 12 months in prison in September, before being mistakenly released from jail and has since been deported.
The Bell has been used to house single adult males since April last year, and first housed asylum seekers from May 2020 to March 2021. The authority had asked the High Court to issue a temporary injunction blocking asylum seekers from staying at the Essex hotel last August.
The council claimed that the hotel’s use as asylum seeker accommodation breached planning rules. Somani Hotels, who own the site, opposed the claim.
Mr Justice Eyre granted the temporary injunction on August 19 ahead of a full hearing of the legal claim. The judge also refused the Home Office’s bid to intervene in the case, which he said was “not necessary”.
The Court of Appeal then overturned both decisions on August 29, with three judges finding that the department could “materially contribute to the judicial decision-making” in the case and that the decision to grant the temporary injunction was “seriously flawed in principle”.
In November, the High Court refused its application for a final injunction to stop the use of the Bell Hotel in Epping for asylum seeker accommodation.
In December, the Supreme Court handed down a judgment from an earlier court application, which refused the council’s attempt to overturn the decision allowing the Home Office to intervene in the case.
In March, the council was refused permission to appeal the decision taken by The Honourable Mr Justice Mould in November.
After that, the leader of Epping Forest District Council, Chris Whitbread, said: “We may not have been successful, but this is evidence that we have changed the debate around the Government’s use of hotels for housing asylum seekers.
“The number of hotels in use has reduced approximately by half, and without Epping having taken this action, it is doubtful that this would be the case.”
At the time of the interim figure of £566,000 was revealed in February a spokesperson for Epping Forest District Council said: “As a council, we take our duty to protect the interests of our residents extremely seriously.”
They added: “We recognise the importance of value for money. The council agreed to pursue further action only after careful consideration of the legal advice and costs and on the basis that it was a necessary and proportionate step to protect residents’ interests and uphold due process.”
The council has been asked to comment on the latest cost figure.
