The UK government is facing a legal challenge to strict new rules which will force impoverished asylum seekers in Scotland to travel to Liverpool for appointments with immigration officials from tomorrow.

Lawyers are working with a charity which represents penniless refugees to build a case against the change, revealed in last week's Sunday Herald.

Most asylum seekers are not permitted to work in the UK and survive on food stamps. The new system will apply to refugees who have had their initial application rejected and all financial support withdrawn.

In a letter sent to stakeholders only a fortnight ago, UK Visas and Immigration CEO Mike Wells, said: "From 26th January 2015 we will require all failed asylum seekers wishing to submit further submissions to make an appointment to do so, in person, in Liverpool."

The decision has been criticised by Scottish Government Communities Secretary Alex Neil, who has written to Home Secretary Theresa May to urge her to reconsider, and charities which offer support to refugees who arrive in the UK after fleeing persecution.

Glasgow-based Positive Action in Housing, which campaigns for refugees, now plans to take on the UK government with the support of a leading immigration lawyer.

The charity's director Robina Qureshi said: "We are disgusted that the government is deliberately obstructing refugees seeking asylum by forcing them to travel to Liverpool to submit further evidence.

"They refuse to pay for travel to Liverpool for those refugees submitting fresh evidence for a judicial review or under article 8 of the human rights act, and will not be allowed to make submissions by post.

"While the rest of society is permitted to post or email information to utility providers, housing benefits, or even the passport office, refugees seeking asylum are expected to travel to Liverpool without any source of income whatsoever, or face having their asylum claims refused outright. Clearly the government is trying to block successful claims.

"There are good reasons for challenging the Liverpool decision which will adversely affect the elderly, sick, pregnant women, those suffering past trauma, those with limited networks or whose first language is not English. The ones who will suffer as always will be the poorest and most vulnerable.

"We intend to gather support to challenge this disgraceful policy. We are also working closely with asylum law firm Latta & Co to mount a legal challenge to this latest attempt to block refugees from seeking protection in the UK."

Fraser Latta of Latta & Co suggested the UK government may have contravened European legislation which protects refugees.

He said: "I am currently in the process of examining the lawfulness of the proposed changes. They appear on the face of it to potentially obstruct the applicant's rights under the Refugee Convention, the European Convention of Rights and the Qualification Directive.

"The claimed objective is to create a more efficient system. In reality it appears to be another attempt to create difficulties in accessing the asylum system. Indeed, it could be argued that this is in an attempt to force vulnerable people to abandon claims ... It appears that this is simply a move which will create further obstacles for applicants and further delays for the Home Office."

The change will be enforced from tomorrow and Positive Action in Housing has a fund which will provide grants for asylum seekers who will be forced to travel to Liverpool.

Qureshi said: "We will be offering crisis grants to pay for asylum seekers to travel by bus to Liverpool in order to prove their claims.

"Members of the public can donate to the Winter Destitution Fund by visiting paih.org and clicking on the link on the home page."

When asked for comment the Home Office claimed it did "not comment on legal matters". Officials then issued the same statement the Home Office put out last week in response to the Sunday Herald's initial story about the change to asylum rules.

It read: "The United Kingdom has a long and proud history of offering sanctuary to those who genuinely need it and each claim is carefully considered on its individual merits.

"But when someone is found not to need our protection, we expect them to leave the country voluntarily. Where they do not, we will seek to enforce their departure.

"These changes will apply only to failed asylum seekers whose claims have already been refused. They will significantly speed up decision-making, enabling us to grant protection more quickly to those who genuinely need it."