Recommendation 1
Introduce a time limit for immigration detention (repeated from 2018, 2019 and 2020).
Source · IMB Annual Report
Gatwick IRC
AI-generated report summary The 2021 report covers the first year of the combined Gatwick IRC (Brook House and Tinsley House) under merged IMB oversight and Serco management, with the year dominated by Covid-19 restrictions, unprecedented Channel crossing arrivals through Tinsley House, and ongoing Home Office case management failures leading to prolonged and often unnecessary detention. While Serco staff generally treated detained men with respect and compassion, systemic failings in mental health support, access to legal advice, property management, and Home Office communication remained serious and in many cases repeated concerns.
Year: 2021
Published: 23 Jun 2022
Type: IRC
Population: 107
Recommendations: 17
Key concerns
Positive findings
Safety statistics
| Indicator | This year | Previous |
|---|---|---|
| Deaths in custody | 0 | — |
| Use of force | 157 | — |
| Drug finds | 10 | — |
Positive findings
AI-generated summarySerco introduced an improved standardised reception and induction process from April, including a house rules booklet in 22 languages with earlier Welfare team involvement. A new Vulnerable Residents meeting improved focus on individual vulnerability needs. Officers generally treated detained men with respect and dignity. Healthcare transitioned successfully to Practice Plus Group from September, with expanded services including podiatry and physiotherapy. Catering received largely positive feedback (66% positive). No deaths occurred at either centre in 2021. Self-harm and ACDT figures fell substantially from the exceptionally high 2020 levels.
Key concerns
At the end of December, 34% of the population had been there for more than 10 weeks20; Mr AA21 had been detained in Brook House for 343 days (49 weeks).
Home Office Detention Gatekeeper not adequately preventing detention of men with serious mental health needs; two men sectioned under the Mental Health Act during 2021.
Source wording under review
Cohorting and bubbling has led to some men being moved numerous times from wing to wing in Brook House. We presume that these moves, made under Home Office instruction, were intended to maximise the effective capacity and to release beds for further intake. There have been informal and formal complaints from men about this; one formal complaint from seven men referring to them having been “treated like cattle”.
7.2.4. Access to legal advice There has been anecdotal evidence for some time about poor mobile phone reception in Brook House having a negative impact on the ability of detained men to communicate with their solicitors. The reception problems were confirmed in July in an expert report which has recommended adding boosters throughout the centre.
53% of men leaving Brook House in 2021 were released rather than removed, raising questions about the lawfulness of their initial detention.
Source wording under review
Complaints process not operating fairly: 13% success rate, 20% withdrawal rate, 20-working-day response time, and frontline officers as investigators.
Source wording under review
Systemic loss of detained men's property between Dover and Tinsley House; no effective tracing system and generic, boilerplate responses to enquiries.
Source wording under review
This did not improve in 2021. From May to December there were a total of 51 age disputes, 31 of whom were ultimately released to the local authority.
Bail accommodation delays leaving men in detention beyond bail grant; 8% of Brook House population awaiting accommodation in mid-December.
Source wording under review
41% of Tinsley House departures between 9pm and 7am; groups of 43 and 37 men released at 23:58 and 00:30 on separate nights.
Source wording under review
Adults at Risk In our annual reports for 2019 and 2020 the Board pressed for a review of Adults at Risk (AAR), ACDT and Rule 35 policy and procedure. While we were told that these were under review in 2019, we noted in 2020 that there had been no progress. We are disappointed that this situation has not changed in 2021. Indeed, although we heard in May that new paperwork to go with the AAR process had been put on hold while the Home Office reviewed the Detention Service Order on AAR, at the end of the year there had been no change and no information about a future timeline.
Mental health support insufficient; psychology services unavailable for most of 2021; use of force to prevent self-harm rose to 28% of all UoF incidents.
Source wording under review
Planned dental suite at Brook House still not operational by 31 December 2021 despite longstanding recommendation.
Source wording under review
Insufficient vocational training at Brook House; virtual college limited to eight short courses with low uptake.
Source wording under review
8 n/a n/a Rule 42 (hours) Rule 40 has been used less frequently than in 2020 and 2019 (160 and 187 events respectively). On nine occasions, men have been held in separation to facilitate their removal; this includes eight men who were due to fly on the charter flight to Jamaica in November. The Board questions the necessity, appropriateness and legality of using Rule 40 as a blanket approach in such circumstances.
De facto separation via informal 'Rule 15' — men held in CSU beyond Rule 40 expiry due to Covid-related placement difficulties — no legal basis identified.
Source wording under review
Recommendations
Recommendation 2
There should be some supplementary basic information provided by the Home Office on the steps in the asylum claim process that arrivals will go through while held in the RSTHF. The Home Office should follow the suggestion in paragraph 8 of Detention Services Order 06/2013 to repeat the important basic information through use of a format such as posters and leaflets (section 4.1).
Recommendation 3
Home Office and Serco should consider how the perceptions of the detained men about their safety can be collected consistently through the year and used as a meaningful tool for improving the centres' management (section 4.3).
Recommendation 4
As we have recommended for the past two years, there should be a full review of Adults at Risk (AAR), ACDT and Rule 35 policy and procedure (section 4.4).
Recommendation 5
The role of the Detention Gatekeeper should be reviewed, in particular its effectiveness in preventing men with significant mental health issues or vulnerabilities from being detained (section 4.4), and psychological support provided on-site in the Gatwick centres should be increased (section 6.3).
Recommendation 6
Operation of the process for complaints against Serco should be reviewed, including factors behind withdrawal rates, and this should consider changes such as introducing specialist teams to handle complaints, shortening the time for responses, and whether contractual penalties for substantiated complaints can be modified (section 5.7).
Recommendation 7
Suitable systems and organisation should be put in place to avoid detained men's property being lost at Dover or en route to Gatwick, and to find it rapidly if it is lost or misplaced (section 5.8).
Recommendation 8
Proactive engagement processes should be instituted and communication should be improved so that detained men are kept adequately informed of the progress of their immigration and asylum cases and bail applications (section 7.2).
Recommendation 9
Suitable technical equipment should be installed in Brook House to provide adequate mobile phone access for the detained men to ensure that they have meaningful access to advice from their solicitors and contact with their families (sections 7.2.4, 7.3).
Recommendation 10
Home Office should work with the Legal Aid Agency law firms and Serco to ensure a return to fixed time and on-site in-person appointments for detained men (section 7.2.4).
Recommendation 11
Training should be strengthened for frontline staff, especially in Tinsley House, to help ensure that potentially under-age individuals are identified and feel able to challenge the age imputed to them (section 4.4.3).
Recommendation 12
While we recognise that controls are needed to manage Covid risks, the Board considers that more could be done to ensure uptake of educational opportunities at Brook House (section 7.1).
Recommendation 13
The Board believes that some activities, such as English language classes, should be offered to men detained in Tinsley House even when it is a RSTHF (section 7.1).
Recommendation 14
There are insufficient opportunities for detained men to acquire vocational skills which might assist them on return or release. The vocational training programmes available at Brook House should be reviewed and expanded. In particular, while the Board welcomes the introduction of online Virtual College courses, their range and relevance to the centre's population should be improved (section 7.1).
Recommendation 15
Serco should work with the Legal Aid Agency law firms and the Home Office to ensure a return to fixed time and on-site in-person appointments for detained men (section 7.2.4).
Recommendation 16
Systems and training should be improved, or additional resource provided if necessary, to ensure adequate and effective monitoring of men whose physical or mental condition may be deteriorating (sections 6.1, 6.3).
Recommendation 17
The planned dental suite should be implemented and on-site dental services begun (section 6.2).
Applications to the IMB
| Category | Current | Previous |
|---|---|---|
| Accommodation (incl. laundry, showers) | 1 | 1 |
| Conduct of staff and detained men (incl. bullying) | 6 | 1 |
| Covid measures | 19 | 0 |
| Equality | 0 | 0 |
| Escorts | 1 | 1 |
| Finance | 0 | 2 |
| Food and kitchens | 11 | 1 |
| Health (physical, mental, social care) | 21 | 17 |
| Immigration case (incl. access to legal advice) | 46 | 20 |
| Letters, faxes, visits, phones, internet access | 1 | 1 |
| Other | 0 | 1 |
| Property during transfer or in another establishment | 5 | 3 |
| Property within centre | 3 | 0 |
| Purposeful activity (education, paid work, training, library) | 4 | 0 |
| Use of force, removal from association | 1 | 1 |
Other reports for Gatwick IRC
Population 406
· Concerns
· Concerns
· Concerns