Only about one percent of asylum seekers in the UK have genuine protection reasons. This claim comes from an experienced official at the UK Home Office, who describes a system in which fabricated stories and fake documents have become so common that certain recurring tales have turned into internal jokes among staff.

The information comes from a long-serving caseworker at the UK Home Office, interviewed anonymously by The Times. The man, referred to as “J” in the newspaper, is said to have made decisions in thousands of asylum cases over the years.

His view of the operation is highly critical. According to him, fraud is widespread, while the agency’s procedures make it difficult and time-consuming for caseworkers to reject applications they suspect are based on fabricated stories.

– At best, one percent of asylum seekers are genuine. There is scarcely any part of the asylum system that is not either plagued by extensive fraud or simply functions very poorly. Nothing works as it should, he told The Times.

The Same Stories Keep Repeating

A recurring phenomenon is what, according to J, caseworkers call “package claims”—applications where people with the same background submit similar or identical stories about why they need protection.

One example involves a large number of Iraqi Kurds who claim to have been in a relationship with the daughter of the prime minister in the Kurdish region of Iraq. According to J, the number of men telling the same story amounts to hundreds, which eventually became a standing joke among the staff.

Another recurring tactic is reported among asylum seekers from Pakistan. Hundreds of men have claimed they risk their lives in their home country because of their homosexuality—while many of them have said they have been in a relationship with the same man.

READ ALSO: The Unaccompanied Minors Scam: 7 out of 10 are Adults

This man, in turn, is said to have written large numbers of support letters to back up their stories. The caseworkers have also received photographs showing Pakistani men posing together at the same gay club in East London. These pictures were used as proof of their sexual orientation.

The Home Office has previously noted the problem of false asylum claims based on alleged homosexuality. A BBC investigation earlier uncovered a business in which lawyers and immigration advisers, for a fee, offered help constructing such cases.

Claimed to Be Party Leaders

Similar patterns are described among applicants from Bangladesh. In recent years, many have claimed they risk political persecution because they were active in the Awami League, which ruled Bangladesh until 2024 but was later banned.

According to J, people claiming high positions such as chairman, vice chairman, or general secretary have often struggled to answer basic questions about the party’s policies and their own roles within the organization.

In some cases, the applications have been supplemented with what the caseworker describes as fake police documents. The same names of judges and other officials are said to have appeared repeatedly.

Verifying the authenticity of documents directly with authorities in the country of origin, however, is not possible. Confidentiality rules prevent UK authorities from contacting the home country about an individual’s asylum application, as such contact could endanger a real refugee.

Applicants Have Time to Prepare Their Stories

J also criticizes the asylum process itself. When someone applies for asylum, a short initial interview is held to collect basic information. The more extensive interview, which can last several hours, is held later.

According to the whistleblower, this gap gives applicants time to seek advice, prepare their stories, and arrange supporting documentation. He therefore believes that those seeking asylum should from the outset be required to give a detailed explanation of their protection reasons.

The Home Office has shortened wait times between interviews, but according to J, applicants can, among other things, further postpone the process by presenting medical certificates.

Easier to Approve Than Reject

The whistleblower also describes what he considers a built-in bias within the agency. Approving an application, he claims, can take around half an hour, while a rejection can require several hours of work. If an application is rejected, the caseworker must address every point raised by the applicant in detail and explain why protection is not warranted.

He also notes that, according to him, staff have been instructed to refer to asylum seekers as “customers.” This, he believes, reflects a culture in which caseworkers are expected to provide a service to the applicant, rather than represent the interests of the state.

Agency Denies Allegations

The whistleblower’s estimate that only one percent have genuine asylum reasons differs sharply from official decisions. In the year up to June, 42,394 people were granted refugee status after a total of 115,394 first-instance decisions. That corresponds to 38 percent. However, this percentage has dropped sharply from 77 percent in 2022.

The Home Office does not comment on information from an anonymous source, but rejects the impression that the agency lacks the ability to detect fraud. According to the department, every application is individually examined by trained caseworkers who assess the applicant’s story, documentation, and information about conditions in the country of origin.

The agency also states that it has established procedures for assessing credibility and detecting fraud. If it is found that a person has provided false information, the decision to grant protection can be revoked.

The government is also working on new migration and asylum legislation, which according to the Home Office will speed up processing and make it harder to misuse the system. The Home Office message is that those who try to cheat their way to the right to stay should be refused and made to leave the UK.