(Commonwealth_Europe) Migrant rights groups have raised concerns that British residents may still face barriers when returning from abroad due to the transition to digital visas, despite the government’s recent extension of the deadline by three months. The Home Office revealed last week that the shift to eVisas, as the primary proof of British residency, would begin at the end of March 2025, moving the original deadline of 31 December. This delay follows technical issues that have plagued the rollout.
Many are concerned that the new timeline, while generally welcomed, may not adequately inform overseas airport staff and border officials, potentially leading to the denial of travel or stranding of British residents abroad. Groups such as the Immigration Law Practitioners’ Association (ILPA) and the EU citizens’ rights group, the 3 Million, voiced their concerns in a letter to the Home Office, citing past experiences that demonstrate crucial information frequently fails to reach all carriers and airport personnel.
According to government rules, if a transport operator brings a passenger to the UK who is later refused entry, the operator is responsible for covering the cost of returning the passenger. However, the letter pointed out that since carriers are commercially focused and risk-averse, they are likely to deny boarding unless they confirm with UK authorities that the passenger has the right to travel.
Monique Hawkins, policy and research officer for the 3 million, warned that the government’s delay might cause further disruptions. “We need reassurances that no one who gets stuck abroad through no fault of their own will have to carry the financial, emotional, and disruptive burden of it,” she said. She emphasized that the responsibility should lie with the government, not individuals who must navigate expired documents to prove their eligibility for travel.
A series of technical difficulties have plagued the eVisa system, already implemented for EU citizens in the UK. These issues have led to people losing job opportunities, facing problems with tenancy, and struggling with travel. Hawkins pointed out that the current system is “not fit for purpose” given these persistent errors.
The Home Office has set up a round-the-clock “support hub” for transport operators to check passengers’ immigration status, but the resolution center for passengers is only available during British daytime hours, often with wait times exceeding an hour. Although 3.1 million people have accessed their eVisas this year via the UK Visas and Immigration (UKVI) online portal, the government has not clarified how many people still need to complete the process.
After the extended deadline, biometric residency permits (BRPs) will no longer be valid as proof of immigration status. Campaigners worry that the shift to eVisas will continue to cause complications, despite the acceptance of passport ink stamps and visa vignettes from before the introduction of BRPs.
Josephine Whitaker-Yilmaz from the migrant rights charity Praxis described the ongoing issues with the eVisa rollout, citing cases where families have been denied child benefits or banks have refused to recognize eVisas as proof of status. She warned that these kinds of administrative errors can push vulnerable families into poverty or homelessness.
Other individuals have struggled with the eVisa system’s technological requirements, including those without smartphones or consistent internet access. Sara Alsherif, program manager at the Open Rights Group, mentioned that even when people successfully create UKVI accounts and receive confirmation emails, they sometimes cannot access their eVisas due to continued technical issues. These problems have even extended to linking refugee travel documents to the eVisa system.
Despite the government’s delay, the issues that have plagued the system are far from resolved. Alsherif argued that the extension had created additional problems by removing the option to issue new BRPs. Many people find themselves in a state of uncertainty, unsure of how to navigate the immigration process or prove their right to work, rent, or re-enter the country, without a clear alternative to prove residency rights.
