A Home Office video circulating on Facebook has attracted attention with a stark warning: “A £60,000 fine or 5 years in jail.”
The figures are real, but they relate to different legal consequences and do not apply to every business or individual in the same way.
From 1 October 2026, changes to the UK Right to Work Scheme will extend the rules beyond traditional employees to certain other working arrangements, including some self-employed contractors, individual subcontractors and online matching arrangements. The changes are particularly relevant to businesses operating in food delivery, courier and last-mile delivery.
For businesses using delivery riders or drivers, the important question is therefore not simply “Can I be fined £60,000?”
It is:
Who is legally responsible for checking the person doing the work, and what must the business do to protect itself?
This guide explains what the changes mean for:
- delivery platforms
- restaurants and takeaways using their own riders
- courier and last-mile businesses
- businesses using subcontracted drivers
- riders who share, rent or substitute delivery accounts
It also explains the difference between a civil penalty, criminal prosecution and director disqualification.
Important: This article reflects the law and published government material available as at 23 September 2026. The Home Office Employer’s Guide dated 11 September 2026 is still published as draft guidance, although the underlying legislative changes are due to take effect on 1 October 2026.
What changes on 1 October 2026?
Traditionally, right to work checks have focused on employees. The Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025 expands the relevant provisions so that certain other working arrangements can fall within the Right to Work Scheme.
Section 14A extends the meaning of “employing” for the purposes of sections 15 to 24 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006. This includes certain workers’ contracts, individual subcontractors and online matching services.
Section 15A also creates an extended liability mechanism for certain businesses further up a contractual chain.
The new requirements take effect from 1 October 2026. The 2026 regulations also introduce additional requirements for businesses seeking a statutory excuse where extended liability applies, including contractual arrangements and systems for confirming that the person performing the work is the person who was checked.
This does not mean that every self-employed person or every business in food delivery or construction automatically falls within the new rules.
The working arrangement and contractual structure matter.
£60,000 civil penalty: When can it apply?
A business that engages a person who does not have permission to undertake the relevant work can face a civil penalty if it cannot establish the required statutory excuse.
The current Home Office guidance states that a civil penalty can be up to £60,000 per illegal worker.
The civil penalty is different from the criminal offence of knowingly employing an illegal worker.
In broad terms:
| Situation | Potential consequence |
|---|---|
| Person is engaged without the required right to work and the business has no statutory excuse | Civil penalty |
| Business knows, or has reasonable cause to believe, the person is disqualified from working | Criminal offence may arise |
| Serious or repeated non-compliance | Additional enforcement consequences may follow |
| Company director is convicted or becomes subject to relevant disqualification proceedings | Director disqualification may be possible |
The important point is that a civil penalty does not require the same level of knowledge as a criminal prosecution. The Home Office explains that businesses can face a civil penalty where the prescribed checks were not properly completed, while the criminal offence requires knowledge or reasonable cause to believe that the worker is disqualified.
What does the “5 years in jail” warning actually mean?
The five-year figure relates to the criminal offence under section 21 of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006.
A person can commit the offence where they employ someone who is disqualified from working because of their immigration status and know, or have reasonable cause to believe, that the person is disqualified.
The maximum sentence on indictment is five years’ imprisonment, an unlimited fine, or both.
This is therefore a very different situation from an administrative civil penalty.
The distinction is important:
Civil penalty: the business may be liable because the required checks and statutory excuse were not in place.
Criminal offence: the prosecution must concern the relevant knowledge or reasonable cause to believe that the individual was not permitted to work.
Businesses should not treat the £60,000 figure and five-year imprisonment figure as two parts of the same automatic penalty.
Which delivery businesses are affected?
1. Delivery platforms
Businesses operating online delivery platforms need to examine carefully how riders are engaged.
The new rules can apply to certain arrangements involving individual subcontractors and online matching services from 1 October 2026. The Home Office’s draft guidance contains examples dealing with platform-based work and substitution arrangements.
This means platforms should not assume that describing a rider as “self-employed” removes their right to work responsibilities.
Where the platform is legally within scope, it may need to:
- carry out the prescribed right to work check;
- retain the necessary evidence;
- deal with substitute riders correctly;
- prevent an unverified substitute from carrying out deliveries;
- maintain systems to confirm the identity of the person actually working.
The new rules also place greater importance on identity verification where substitution is permitted. Article 5B requires systems and processes designed to ensure that the person carrying out the work is the same individual who was checked.
2. Restaurants and takeaways using their own riders
Restaurants and takeaways should distinguish between their employees and other types of delivery arrangements.
If a restaurant employs its riders as employees, the traditional Right to Work Scheme already applies.
The position changes where a business engages riders under arrangements that fall within the new categories introduced from 1 October 2026.
A contract describing someone as “self-employed” does not, by itself, determine whether the Right to Work Scheme applies.
The actual working arrangement matters.
If a takeaway uses an external courier company, the contractual chain must also be examined carefully. Depending on the structure, responsibility may sit with the direct engager, while a business further up the chain may have extended liability and separate requirements for obtaining a statutory excuse.
3. Courier and last-mile delivery businesses
Courier and last-mile delivery businesses often operate through several contractual layers.
For example:
Retailer → Carrier → Delivery company → Driver
The delivery company may directly engage the driver, while the carrier sits higher in the contractual chain.
From 1 October 2026, the extended liability provisions can become relevant to certain arrangements further up the chain.
Businesses in this position should not simply rely on a subcontractor saying:
“We have checked all our drivers.”
The regulations introduce specific requirements for businesses seeking protection from civil penalty liability in certain extended-liability situations.
These include contractual provisions dealing with right to work compliance and systems for confirming that the person actually providing the service is the person who was checked.
4. Riders who share, rent or substitute delivery accounts
Account sharing creates a separate compliance risk.
Where a contract allows substitution, the business responsible for the right to work check may need to check the substitute as well as the original worker.
Article 5B specifically requires businesses permitting substitution to comply with the prescribed requirements for the substitute, prevent the substitute from working before the relevant checks are completed and maintain systems to confirm the identity of the person providing the work.
This means a rider should not simply give their account to another person and assume that the platform’s original right to work check covers them.
For businesses, allowing account sharing without appropriate controls can create significant compliance problems.
What protects a business from a civil penalty?
The key protection is a statutory excuse.
A statutory excuse can protect an employer from a civil penalty where the prescribed right to work requirements have been properly followed.
The Home Office recognises prescribed manual checks, Home Office online right to work checks and the relevant digital verification arrangements.
For businesses operating delivery models, this means the process should be more than simply asking a driver:
“Do you have the right to work in the UK?”
The business needs to complete the correct check and retain the appropriate evidence.
What right to work checks should businesses carry out?
Depending on the individual’s circumstances, the prescribed process can include:
Manual document check
The business checks the required original documents and follows the prescribed procedure.
Home Office online right to work check
Where applicable, the individual provides a share code so the employer can access their right to work information through the Home Office system.
Digital verification
The relevant digital verification arrangements can also apply where the prescribed requirements are met.
The government guidance also provides for the Employer Checking Service in certain circumstances, including where a person has a pending application or appeal and the relevant requirements are satisfied.
The important point is that the check must be carried out correctly and at the right time.
What if the business allows substitutions?
This is one of the areas that delivery platforms, restaurants and courier companies should review before October.
Where a contractual arrangement permits substitution, the business may need to check the substitute before they start working.
The regulations require, among other things:
- the substitute to be checked before providing the work;
- the business to prevent an unchecked substitute from working;
- appropriate enforcement provisions in the contract;
- systems to confirm the identity of the person actually working.
These requirements are specifically addressed by new article 5B.
In practical terms, a business should not rely on the account holder to carry out a substitute’s right to work check on its behal
Can directors be disqualified?
Director disqualification is a separate issue from the Home Office civil penalty.
The Home Office does not simply issue a £60,000 penalty and automatically ban a director.
Director disqualification operates under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986 and can arise through different routes, including proceedings connected with criminal convictions, insolvency-related conduct or public-interest proceedings.
A director convicted of a relevant indictable offence connected with the management of a company can potentially face disqualification proceedings.
The maximum period for certain director disqualification orders can be 15 years.
Therefore, “director disqualification” should not be understood as an automatic consequence of every right to work breach.
Can a business be closed?
In certain circumstances, immigration enforcement powers can also affect business premises.
The Home Office’s existing guidance identifies closure of a business and court-issued compliance orders among the possible consequences associated with illegal working.
This is particularly relevant for businesses operating physical premises, such as restaurants and takeaways.
The consequences can therefore extend beyond the original civil penalty.
For businesses with premises licences, alcohol licences or other regulated permissions, immigration compliance can also become relevant to licensing decisions.
Does this apply only to food delivery and construction?
No.
The new rules are not based on a list of sectors.
The legal question is largely about the nature of the working arrangement and, where relevant, the contractual chain.
The Home Office’s draft guidance gives examples covering different types of work and explains that the examples are not exhaustive.
This means similar questions can arise in:
- logistics
- courier services
- hospitality
- cleaning
- construction
- delivery services
- online matching businesses
- other businesses using contractors or subcontractors.
Are all self-employed contractors affected?
No.
Simply calling someone “self-employed” does not automatically bring them into the new rules, nor does it automatically take them outside them.
The nature of the relationship needs to be examined.
The Home Office’s draft guidance specifically recognises that some genuinely independent businesses may fall outside the Right to Work Scheme, while other arrangements described as self-employment may fall within it.
For businesses using self-employed delivery drivers, this is one of the areas where obtaining tailored legal advice can be particularly important.
What businesses should do before 1 October 2026
With the new rules approaching, delivery businesses should consider carrying out a practical compliance review.
1. Identify everyone doing the work
Create a list of:
- employees
- workers
- self-employed individuals
- individual subcontractors
- agency workers
- substitute drivers
- subcontracted delivery companies.
2. Review the contracts
Do not rely solely on job titles.
Check what the contract actually requires and who has contracted with whom.
3. Check your right to work process
Make sure the prescribed check is completed correctly before the relevant person begins work.
4. Review substitution arrangements
If drivers can send someone else to work, establish exactly how the substitute will be checked and how their identity will be verified.
5. Review subcontractor agreements
Where you are relying on a subcontractor, check whether your contract contains the provisions required to establish the relevant statutory excuse under the new rules.
6. Keep proper records
A right to work check is only useful as a compliance measure if the business can demonstrate that it was completed correctly.
7. Train the people carrying out checks
Managers and onboarding staff should understand what they are required to check and what evidence needs to be retained.
What is confirmed law and what is still draft?
This distinction matters because some of the Home Office material currently available is guidance rather than primary legislation.
As at 23 September 2026:
| Issue | Position |
|---|---|
| Extension of the Right to Work Scheme | Legislative changes due to apply from 1 October 2026 |
| Section 14A and related provisions | Introduced through the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025 |
| Section 15A extended liability | Part of the new framework |
| Article 5B requirements | Provided for by the 2026 regulations from 1 October 2026 |
| Revised civil penalty code | Comes into force on 1 October 2026 |
| Home Office Employer’s Guide dated 11 September 2026 | Still marked as draft |
| Maximum civil penalty | Up to £60,000 per illegal worker |
| Criminal offence | Up to five years’ imprisonment and/or an unlimited fine in serious cases |
The government has confirmed that the revised employer guidance applies to employment commencing on or after 1 October 2026 for the new categories, while the draft guidance remains subject to the status indicated on GOV.UK.
What does this mean for your business?
The headline figures can make the new rules sound straightforward:
£60,000 fine. Five years in prison. Director disqualification.
In reality, these are different legal consequences with different requirements.
A civil penalty can arise where the required right to work checks have not been properly carried out and the business cannot establish a statutory excuse.
Criminal liability is different and involves knowledge or reasonable cause to believe that the individual was not permitted to work.
Director disqualification is a separate legal process.
And for businesses operating physical premises or regulated activities, there can be additional immigration and licensing consequences.
For delivery platforms, restaurants, takeaways and courier businesses, the most important step is therefore to understand who is responsible for the check in your particular business model.
How CSRLaw Can Help
The changes coming into force on 1 October 2026 mean that businesses using delivery workers and contractors should review their current arrangements now.
At CSR Law, we can help businesses understand their right to work obligations, review working arrangements and identify potential immigration compliance risks.
We can assist with:
- Right to Work compliance
- self-employed and contractor arrangements
- delivery driver and courier arrangements
- subcontracting structures
- account-sharing and substitution issues
- civil penalty matters
- immigration compliance advice
- sponsor licence and wider immigration issues.
If you are unsure whether your delivery drivers, contractors or subcontractors are covered by the new rules, getting advice before 1 October 2026 can help you understand your obligations and put appropriate procedures in place.
Contact CSR Law
📞 +44 7586980156
📧 info@csrlaw.co.uk
🌐 https://csrlaw.co.uk/
For tailored advice about your circumstances, speak to a qualified immigration professional.
Conclusion
The £60,000 civil penalty and five-year prison sentence are real, but they do not represent one automatic punishment for every business that gets a right to work check wrong.
From 1 October 2026, the Right to Work Scheme will cover a wider range of working arrangements, making the issue particularly important for businesses using contractors, subcontractors and delivery workers.
The safest approach is to look beyond the label “employee” or “self-employed” and examine the actual working and contractual arrangement.
If your business uses delivery riders, drivers or subcontractors, now is the time to review who you engage, how they are engaged and how their right to work is checked.