It's the kind of short, silly end -piece story which tabloids use to amuse readers. If it is fed into an agency and taken from there, it's not going to be checked; the time and cost of checking the facts are not proportionate to the news value of the story.
The Daily Mail is suspect because the headline is quite often not supported by the details given in the story itself; maybe the subs don't read the story before setting the headline, maybe the Mail's readership isn't expected to read the story carefully beyond the headline and, perhaps, the first sentence; sometimes the headline and story are completely false in picking on some incidental detail and representing that as the complete story.
It's main fault lies in its necessary desire, because of the age and class of its readers, to appeal to their prejudices and fears. Hence 'outrage', 'anger', ' uproar' and other hyperbole in its stories, and its curious interest in those who are foreign or of foreign descent. Imagine a 75 year-old man in a bar or a golf club, raging about how much worse everything is, and you have the picture.