Clearsprings’ asylum accommodation profits: are landlords getting a fair deal?

MPs have questioned the profits, reinvestment and group payments associated with Clearsprings. What do the landlords supplying its properties make of the arrangement, and does their experience match the promise of guaranteed rent and less hassle?

Guaranteed rent, a long contract and less day-to-day management would appeal to plenty of landlords. Add a business supplying accommodation to the Home Office and the proposition deserves a proper look, especially for owners who want dependable income without managing every tenancy themselves.

After watching MPs question Clearsprings Ready Homes, I want to hear from the landlords who supply the homes. There is plenty of discussion about the money going through the asylum accommodation system, but readers with first-hand experience can tell us something the headline figures cannot: how the arrangement works when it is your property, your capital and your contract.

The questions put to Clearsprings

The short video bringing these questions together combines separate exchanges from the Home Affairs Committee hearing on 13 May 2025. The witness is managing director Steve Lakey, rather than Graham King, whose wealth is discussed.

In the official parliamentary transcript, Lakey puts Clearsprings’ average profit margin at approximately 6.9%, subject to contractual profit sharing. Later, referring to money held in the group bank account, he speaks of approximately £300 million in profits over five years, with most still available for reinvestment.

MP Chris Murray also raises reports of £17 million paid to an offshore consultancy. Lakey confirms that Bespoke Strategy Solutions, a UAE company owned by King, invoices Clearsprings Group for services. He disputes the stated amount and says the payments come from the group, rather than Ready Homes, and are excluded from the Home Office profit-share calculation. The exchange raises questions about the payments; it does not establish wrongdoing.

Profit is part of running a business, and large contracts involve substantial costs and responsibilities. The commercial questions are whether the customer receives value for money and whether the people supplying the service are rewarded fairly for the work, assets and risks they contribute.

What the £41,000 figure means

The figure that first caught my attention was £41,000 per asylum seeker per year. The underlying IPPR research published in October 2024 estimated the average cost of housing and supporting an asylum seeker across the system in 2023/24. It was not a published rental rate payable to a landlord or a tariff specific to Clearsprings.

Hotels and self-catering homes have very different operating costs. Parliamentary scrutiny has also examined whether the contracts give providers sufficient incentive to replace expensive hotels with cheaper accommodation. The Home Affairs Committee’s subsequent report concluded that the arrangements could reward providers more for hotel use than for procuring other suitable housing.

That leaves a question landlords will understand immediately: if ordinary rented homes can help reduce the public bill, what terms make supplying those homes worthwhile? Comparing a hotel’s total service cost with the rent on a house will not answer it.

The later evidence matters too

There have been developments since the hearing. The Home Office’s 2026–27 estimates memorandum says that, by 4 November 2025, Clearsprings had returned the full £33 million identified for profit sharing, through arrangements involving credit notes. The earlier discussion about money awaiting repayment should therefore be read alongside that update.

Clearsprings also submitted further written evidence in June 2025, saying it had recently invested approximately £7 million in specialist accommodation for people with significant medical needs and was purchasing dispersal properties. Those are relevant parts of the company’s account of how it uses its profits.

What does the landlord receive?

Clearsprings’ landlord recruitment page promotes “Zero Hassle”, “Long Term Contracts” and “Guaranteed Rent”. Those promises will interest owners who want to reduce their workload, but their value becomes clear through the contract and the experience of living with it.

In its parliamentary evidence, Clearsprings describes procurement taking up to three months, insurance costs deterring some owners, compliance works and competition from other housing providers. It also says it seeks to keep property rates low to provide value for the Home Office and avoid pushing up local rents. Landlords, understandably, have their own costs and returns to consider.

A lower headline rent may be perfectly acceptable if income is dependable and genuine management responsibilities are removed. Equally, a long agreement can become expensive if preparation costs, repairs or handback obligations are greater than the owner expected. The rent needs to be assessed alongside everything the landlord still has to fund and do.

Would you sign again?

If you have supplied accommodation to Clearsprings Ready Homes, please share your experience in the comments. Start by saying whether your contract was directly with Clearsprings or with an agent or subcontractor, and roughly when the arrangement began. That will help readers understand whose service you are describing.

Was the rent paid when expected?

What work did you have to complete before payments began, and how were repairs, inspections and access handled afterwards?

If the arrangement has ended, was the property returned on time and in the agreed condition, and were any outstanding costs settled fairly?

Good experiences are just as useful as difficult ones. If it has provided dependable income and more freedom, please explain what made it work. If something went wrong, describe what happened, how the company responded and whether it was resolved, without identifying residents or publishing property addresses.

Most of all, would you sign again, and what would you negotiate differently?

Your answer could help another landlord make a better decision before committing a property for several years.