Hundreds of Turkish nationals are being refused permanent residency in the UK and told to leave, in what lawyers describe as a sudden hardening of decisions on ECAA business visas since the start of the year. Former foreign secretary David Lammy says the pattern recalls the Windrush scandal; the Home Office insists nothing in the rules has changed.

Settlement grants collapse

The ECAA route allows Turkish nationals who set up a business in Britain to settle there. Since January, refusals of indefinite leave to remain for those on the route have risen sharply, and successful applications have fallen from the usual several thousand to just a few hundred.

• •Home Office data records 3,378 grants of settlement to ECAA applicants from January to June 2025, falling to 745 for the same period in 2026 - a 78% drop.
• •Administrative review requests for ECAA applications jumped from 145 in 2025 to 395 in the period from January to mid-August 2026, according to a freedom of information request.

Windrush comparison and Home Office denial

Lammy, the MP for Tottenham, a constituency with a large Turkish-speaking population, said constituents' lives had been devastated by what he saw as a sudden change in policy.

A Home Office spokesperson denied any shift: "There has been no change to how ECAA settlement applications are considered. Every application continues to be considered on its individual circumstances, in line with the published rules and guidance."

The refusals appear to affect applications lodged since September 2025, shortly before Shabana Mahmood announced controversial proposals at the Labour conference for tougher conditions on leave-to-remain applicants. Speaking there, Mahmood said that "in solving this crisis, you may not always like what I do", and that some long-standing assumptions and legal constraints would have to be questioned.

Errors in refusal letters

Lawyers say refusal letters have contained basic errors, made-up requirements and a disregard of circumstances that were previously handled with discretion. Among the cited cases:

• •A woman diagnosed with cancer during a trip to Turkey during the Covid-19 pandemic, when NHS care was restricted, was refused because she "chose" to start treatment there, despite her medical team warning that transferring care "carried significant clinical risk". After a review, the Home Office told her in October that she and her three young children "should now leave the United Kingdom".
• •An applicant was told his window-cleaning business was not legitimate because he lacked a social media presence - a requirement that does not exist. In another overturned refusal, the Home Office said it was "unable to locate a website for your business" and wrongly claimed bank statements were incomplete.
• •The Home Office miscalculated days abroad in one case, incorrectly stating the applicant had been out of the country for more than 180 days within a 12-month period.
• •A woman whose father in Turkey has terminal Alzheimer's was refused on the grounds that the condition had been "known for several years", so her absences did not arise from an "urgent unforeseen situation".

Delays and Windrush review commitments

Lawyers report long delays for applications lodged from September 2025, running beyond the usual six-month wait. They say cases like the ones above were previously routinely approved under guidance on compassionate circumstances, and that the harsher shift began with applications lodged from last September.

The current approach also appears to sit against recommendations of the Windrush review that Priti Patel, then home secretary, accepted and promised to act on: clearer guidance on the burden and standard of proof, more direct contact with applicants, and revised criteria for vulnerable applicants.

Lammy added that the Home Office needs urgently to revisit the Lessons Learned review, calling the situation entirely unacceptable and saying he would like to see justice for Britain's Turkish-origin community. The Home Office maintains that every ECAA application continues to be decided on its individual circumstances in line with the published rules and guidance.