More than 100 EU residents have reportedly received Home Office letters saying their pre-settled status was originally granted “in error”. The notices have raised urgent questions about employment, housing, travel and the future of their right to remain in the UK. Here’s what is confirmed, what remains uncertain, and what affected people should know.
The Home Office has begun reviewing some grants of pre-settled status under the EU Settlement Scheme (EUSS) and has written to a number of recipients stating that their immigration status appears to have been “granted in error.” According to reporting and campaign groups, at least 100 people have received such letters, while a Freedom of Information response obtained by the3million indicated that 95 notices were issued during March alone. The Home Office has not published comprehensive national figures.
The issue has prompted concern from both the Independent Monitoring Authority (IMA)—the statutory body responsible for monitoring the UK’s implementation of the citizens’ rights provisions of the EU–UK Withdrawal Agreement—and campaign organisation the3million, both of which question whether aspects of the policy comply with the Withdrawal Agreement’s safeguards.
Unlike many immigration stories, this one is not simply about who qualifies for status. It is about what happens when the government concludes, years after granting immigration permission, that the original decision should never have been made.
This article provides general information only and should not be treated as individual legal advice. Immigration law is highly fact-specific and this article should be legally reviewed before publication.
What is pre-settled status?
Pre-settled status is limited leave to remain granted under the EU Settlement Scheme to eligible EU, EEA and Swiss citizens—and certain qualifying family members—who had not yet completed five years’ continuous residence when they applied.
Most holders later become eligible for settled status, which provides indefinite permission to remain.
Recent Home Office changes have also introduced automated grants of settled status and automatic extensions for many people whose pre-settled status would otherwise have expired.
What does “granted in error” mean?
The phrase means the Home Office believes the original decision to grant pre-settled status should not have been made under the Immigration Rules.
Importantly, it does not automatically imply:
- fraud;
- dishonesty;
- deception;
- criminal conduct; or
- immediate loss of immigration status.
The reasons may differ between individuals.
Examples could include:
- insufficient evidence that the applicant met the definition of a “relevant EEA citizen” before the Brexit cut-off date;
- eligibility assessed differently in light of later evidence;
- administrative or evidential errors in the original application.
In one published case, the Home Office wrote that the applicant had been granted pre-settled status “without the evidence required to confirm” that she met the definition of a relevant EEA citizen before 31 December 2020.
Not every letter means status has already been cancelled
One of the biggest sources of confusion is that different Home Office communications have different legal effects.
Campaign guidance published by the3million indicates that some recipients first receive a letter giving 14 calendar days to provide additional evidence before a final decision is made. That is not necessarily the same as a cancellation decision.
Readers should distinguish between:
- an evidence request;
- a “minded to” notification;
- a final cancellation or curtailment decision;
- a refusal of settled status;
- changes made to an individual’s digital immigration record.
The legal consequences depend on which document has actually been received.
Does pre-settled status end immediately?
There is no single answer.
Whether someone continues to hold valid immigration status depends on:
- the precise wording of the Home Office notice;
- whether a final decision has been made;
- whether digital status has changed;
- whether any challenge or appeal is underway.
The Home Office has reportedly stated that people whose status it considers to have been granted in error may generally remain until their existing pre-settled status expires, may seek permission through another immigration route, and may apply for settled status, with appeal rights if that application is refused. Those statements should not be treated as applying to every individual case.
Can recipients continue working?
Employers verify immigration status using the Home Office’s online right-to-work system rather than relying solely on correspondence.
If a person’s digital immigration record continues to show valid permission, employers should continue following the official right-to-work checking process.
If that record changes, employers should seek updated guidance before taking employment decisions.
Receiving a letter alone does not necessarily answer whether somebody has lost the legal right to work.
What about renting?
Landlords similarly rely on the Home Office’s online right-to-rent service.
Anyone receiving one of these notices should retain:
- every Home Office letter and email;
- screenshots of their UKVI digital status;
- previous EUSS decision letters;
- proof of residence;
- employment records;
- tenancy documentation.
These documents may become important if the decision is later challenged.
Is it safe to travel?
Travel is potentially one of the highest-risk areas.
Whether somebody can safely leave and re-enter the UK depends on:
- the status recorded in their digital immigration account;
- whether any decision has taken effect;
- whether another form of immigration permission exists;
- the precise procedural stage of the case.
The Home Office has separately reminded EUSS holders to keep their UKVI account details up to date because digital checks are increasingly used by carriers before boarding international travel.
Anyone whose immigration status is under review should obtain specialist legal advice before travelling internationally.
Can the decision be challenged?
The available challenge depends entirely on the legal basis of the Home Office decision.
Possible routes may include:
- an appeal (where legislation provides one);
- administrative reconsideration or review;
- judicial review;
- a fresh immigration application where appropriate.
Not every Home Office decision carries the same appeal rights.
Recipients should carefully read the notice they have received rather than assuming a particular challenge route exists.
Why has the Independent Monitoring Authority raised concerns?
The IMA has said it has raised concerns with the Home Office that aspects of the policy “may be incompatible” with the EU–UK Withdrawal Agreement. The organisation has previously questioned whether allowing status granted in error simply to expire, rather than taking a formal decision carrying procedural safeguards, provides adequate protection for affected citizens.
Campaign organisation the3million argues that, under the Withdrawal Agreement, immigration status should only be withdrawn where doing so is genuinely proportionate and accompanied by appropriate safeguards.
The Home Office has not publicly accepted that interpretation.
How does this compare with earlier disputes?
This is not the first major legal dispute over pre-settled status.
In 2022, the Independent Monitoring Authority successfully challenged the Home Office’s previous policy under which many people risked losing their rights if they failed to make a second application before their pre-settled status expired. That litigation resulted in automatic extensions and, later, wider automation of settled-status grants.
The current dispute is different.
Rather than focusing on automatic expiry, it concerns cases where the Home Office now believes the original grant itself was incorrect.
While some campaigners draw comparisons with Windrush because both involve people who built lives in the UK after relying on government decisions, the legal circumstances are different and the comparison should be treated cautiously.
Questions the Home Office still needs to answer
Several important questions remain unanswered:
- How many “granted in error” notices have been issued?
- How many have resulted in cancellation or curtailment?
- Which eligibility categories are affected?
- Which nationalities are involved?
- How many decisions have been reversed after further evidence?
- What proportion of recipients ultimately obtain settled status?
- What procedural safeguards apply before digital status changes?
Publishing those figures would allow Parliament, affected residents and employers to understand whether these cases represent isolated administrative corrections or a broader review of previous EU Settlement Scheme decisions.
Our reporting continues
We are seeking responses from:
- the Home Office;
- the Independent Monitoring Authority;
- the3million;
- immigration solicitors;
- employers affected by right-to-work changes.
We are also preparing:
- a searchable library of anonymised Home Office letters;
- a visual decision tree explaining each notice type;
- a Freedom of Information investigation into the number of notices, challenges and reversals;
- a secure submission portal allowing readers to confidentially share redacted correspondence.
As further official information becomes available, this guide will be updated.
