Housing Review Methodology As a starting point for the Housing - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Housing Review

Methodology

• As a starting point for the Housing Project, and to develop a better understanding of

related issues facing students, the Insight Team have attempted to collate all research relating to student housing in the city

• A tracking sheet of 32 documents was compiled, consisting of research from

Nottingham & Nottingham Trent Students’ Union, documents from local and national government, Unipol publications, externally commissioned research and a host of other miscellaneous publications

• Using the data analysis software Nvivo, a review of the literature was undertaken and

emergent themes tracked, manifesting (in part) what will be fed back today

Information Sources

The following documents have been used for this presentation:

• Love your home 2014 (UoN)
• Homes fit for study (Nottingham)
• Savill documents (x3)
• Essential House hunting Guide 13/14 (Unipol with UoN)
• Assessment of Student Residence and Housing Market Conditions in Nottingham (Unipol)
• Making Student Housing Better 2012-2015 (Unipol)
• House Hunting Guide 14/15 (Unipol)
• Student experience project (UoN)
• Housing Preferences for students at Nottingham University (UoN)
• The Housing Nottingham Plan 2013-15 (NCC)
• Accommodation Costs (NUS)
• How can we Help 2013/2014 (UoN)

All research compiled is available in SU>Communications>Research>Community>Housing Project

What is a literature review?

• A process of scoping out all information we can find about student living, particularly

in Nottingham, and then reviewing this secondary evidence

Purpose of Literature Review:

• Map all possible housing related research at the disposal of the Students’ Union
• Map findings of research
• Identify gaps
• Identify key issues
• Clarify focus for any future research

What are the pros & cons of a literature review? Pros

• It gives a wide overview of what’s going on
• Provides a largely balanced argument
• Enables you to map what information we currently have, and what areas need to be

explored in more detail Cons

• It’s often time consuming, hard to cover all research, and not that specific
• There will always be ‘one stone left unturned’
• Often, more questions emerge than when you first started! (This is why the lit

review is linked to actions, demographic insight AND questions)

How has the literature been divided?

• The research has initially been divided thematically - covering a wide

variety of housing topics. These range from the condition of properties, to the house hunting process, location and the merits of accreditation schemes

• In addition, the research has also been split into three colour coded

subcategories: Green = change needed Blue = demographic/specific information to help target communications Yellow = Questions that we may wish to explore in the future

Awareness of rights

• Students are most confident of their legal rights in relation to deposits – with 58.26%

stating that they were well informed about their deposit being returned

• Just under a fifth of respondents challenged deductions but had to pay them anyway
• 46.63% stated that they aware of their legal rights in relation to repairs, and 40.70%

aware of their legal rights relating to eviction

• Very few students are using dispute resolution services
• Worryingly - 8.4% of respondents stated that they or others in their household had

been threatened by the landlord

• What are students defining as ‘threatening behaviour’?
• Is this in relation to one landlord or a range of landlords?
• What form does such behaviour take - verbal or physical?
• What is the dispute resolution service, and are we

promoting it?

• Do students know about it/how to access it? Is it suitable for the student market?
• Those students that are confident about their rights –

how did they learn/hear about them – Hearsay? Internet research?

Awareness of rights

Access to support systems

• No first or fourth year students stated that their institution/SU had

influenced their decision to start house hunting - such advice appears to have more traction with second and third year students

• The overwhelming majority of respondents (99.1%) had their contract

checked in some capacity, compared with 97% nationally (Homes fit for study) 20.5% had their contract checked by the SU/institution

• What are the barriers that prevent more first and fourth years using support

services, and the wider student body? Are they receiving support elsewhere – or not at all?

• If they don’t need the support – how are they finding their living

arrangements – hassle free?

Finances

• 17% fall in the number of UK applicants during the first year of £9,000 fees (2012-13)
• Demand from outside of Europe has grown quickly, but also decreased by 1% for the

same period*

• PGs can no longer access a subsidised loan system, required to pay fees upfront,

private bank loans now popular option (Career Development Loan)

Housing discounts:

• Decreasing student numbers = private landlords discounting their empty rooms –

halls have not followed suit

• 2/3rds of students didn’t negotiate discounts – either didn’t feel they needed to or

didn’t know they could

• 50% would have negotiated if they had felt more confident to do so

• On average, the following amounts were paid to secure properties:
• Nottingham: £483.11
• Lenton & Dunkirk: £467.65
• Beeston: £446.25
• This is increasing nationally (increase of 21% between 2009-2011)
• The number of students having their deposit fully withheld in Nottingham is lower than the

national average: 1.2% compared to 8% nationally

• 38.5% agreed with the reductions made by the landlord/letting agent (national average = 23%)
• 22.9% were unsure whether their deposit had been protected
• Landlords/letting agents need to effectively communicate information about the deposit protection

scheme

Finances - Deposits

• 43% of accommodation providers charge admin fees/booking fees 2012/13
• Private rental market (65%) Institutional market (37%)
• Letting agents/landlords need to improve the support they give to tenants if they are to

charge admin fees – 1/3rd stated that they had received some help, just under 1/3rd had no help at all

• The average booking/signing fee nationally is £131 for private rentals and £109 for

institutions - this has decreased over the last 4 years

• Now that online booking is increasing, students would like to know where their admin fee is

going despite not using a face to face service

• Admin and booking fees should only cover work actually undertaken

Finances – Hidden Fees

‘We had to pay a 'reservation fee' even though we didn't need to reserve we were ready to put down the deposit

and that's when they told us it's actually an 'admin fee' and we had to pay it either way’

• The most common rental bracket is £71-80 (excluding bills)
• Rent has gone up by an average of 25% (2009-2012) - this substantially exceeds inflation.
• Student loans/borrowed finance have not increased at same rate
• Living in the community allows for cheaper rent and reduced ‘hidden fees’
• Half of respondents used their student loan to finance the initial payments required for securing

accommodation

• Almost ½ of Nottingham respondents (45.23%) had taken on some form of additional debt to

finance initial tenancy costs (37% nationally)

• Respondents living in halls say that the food they received was poor quality and represented poor

value for money

Finances – Rent

House Hunting

• 75% of students did not experience any problems whilst house hunting, and felt they were making

an informed choice

• 47% strongly agreed that they had made the right choice of where to live
• 46% think that their accommodation feels like home

Methods:

• Students engage in both ‘structured’ & ‘unstructured’ searches online
• Usually supplemented by informal sources of support –NB: this form of networking is often

missed by international students

• The most frequently given responses for choosing a particular type of accommodation were:
• value for money, in a good convenient location and in good condition
• Students are viewing a lot of properties before signing for them - 27.4% viewing 6+ properties in

Nottingham

• Students who spent longer searching for their accommodation were more likely say that they were

satisfied with their property

• Almost 1/3rd of students started their house-hunting in January - just over a fifth started in

December, with another fifth starting in November

• Some landlords/letting agents are adopting unprofessional/irresponsible selling techniques, 30%
• f respondents stated that they were pressured to sign by the landlord/letting agent (this pressure

is most felt in third years)

• According to the Love Your Home research (UoNSU 2014), 1/3rd of respondents experienced

problems with landlords/agents when searching for accommodation. These problems included:

• Landlord/agent dishonesty
• Pressure to sign contracts immediately
• Unclear contracts
• Landlords/agents not turning up for viewings
• Landlords/agents being difficult for those who wish to stay in the property for more than one year
• Landlords/agents loosing data

House Hunting – Feeling Rushed

• Majority of respondents (68.7%) asked to provide a UK based homeowner as a guarantor,

compared to 52% nationally

• A sizeable minority (8.8%) were not able to provide a UK-based guarantor - an issue likely to

disproportionally affect international students

• 1/3rd of participants of the Love Your Home survey (UoNSU 2014) experienced challenges with

finding housemates to live with.

• Main student tip: ‘choose your housemates wisely’
• Students often feel rushed into signing a contract with friends who, in reality, they have only

known for a couple of months

• 37% of students cite that their biggest concern when house hunting is who to live with
• International students/students studying abroad found it challenging to organise viewings while

they were still overseas. Landlords were also reluctant to sign a property to them, and typically asked them to pay more upfront due to the lack of available guarantor. International students those studying abroad need particular support with house hunting.

House Hunting – Other Challenges

• First Years
• The vast majority of first years choose to live in halls - usually the most convenient and sociable

experience

• Pastoral care and student welfare are essential components provided by education institutions

(and of particular interest to parents). There should be a clear description of the care and support package offered to students at the time of letting

• 72% of residents that live in purpose built accommodation are first year students
• Second Years
• Overwhelming majority of those in their second year and above live in the private rental sector
• Highest percentage of students ‘competing’ with others for properties were in second year
• Second years most likely to live with the most number of housemates (2/3rd live with more than 4

people)

• Second years report that they find house hunting much easier than their first year experience,

suggesting that a buddy up system between experienced and inexperienced students may help to alleviate SAC workload

House Hunting – How Preferences Change

• Third Years
• Third year respondents identified the highest levels of pressure from landlords (30%)
• Most anxious about securing the best houses
• Third years view the highest number of properties (average of 5.3)
• Most likely year group to seek SU/institution advice
• Fourth Years
• No fourth year students stated that their institution/SU had influenced their decision to start

house hunting

• Respondents in their fourth year viewed the least number of properties (perhaps because more

defined tastes and smaller number of housemates)

• 11% of returning students and 9% of PGs live in purpose built accommodation
• PGs expressed that there are significant lifestyle differences between the two student groups

House Hunting – How Preferences Change

• According to UoNSU research (Student Experience Project), the majority of students (60%) would

prefer to live closer to the city, rather than their campus. Although being close to their friends is the ultimate factor that influences decision making

• Data from the council indicates the following:
• Lenton (including Park Campus), City Centre and Beeston are most popular with students in
• Nottingham. These locations occupy 46% of students ‘living out’ (total: 24,699 students)
• Lenton and Dunkirk are decreasing in market share, and the popularity and availability of the area is
• changing. In 2007/2008, 29% of all living out students were placed in Lenton, in 2012/2013 this

decreased to 23%.

• The city centre, Beeston and Wollaton (including Jubilee campus) are all increasing in student
• ccupation - may be due to the building of new large developments/apartments

Location

• Sutton Bonington students have identified a sense of isolation at the campus
• Can anything realistically be done to combat this?
• Concerns raised around limited accommodation variety, power of negotiation and letting agent
• ptions around SB
• Unipol does not have many options beyond University Park
• Can a better representation in Kegworth be provided?
• Some SB students expressed that they felt unsupported and/or pressurised to stay in halls for a

second year, and that they experienced poor customer service from HomeLets (the main letting agent in Kegworth)

Sutton Bonington

I don't feel I can ask help to find accommodation in Nottingham, as I am from SB and thus not viewed as a proper student by people on main campus. It's very isolating.’…

• Lenton & Dunkirk population in 2011 = 10,920 - 66% students
• 35% of Lenton & Dunkirk respondents live in accredited properties
• Respondents living in Lenton & Dunkirk felt most pressured into signing contracts - both from

landlords and other students (17% felt pressured)

• More likely to have experienced issues with damp - 27.5% experienced it in their current property
• NCC priorities for this area include:

Lower crime and anti-social behaviour, clean up and tidy environment around home, increase family housing availability, promote community spirit, deal with empty and rundown homes, offer more jobs by creating housework, increase student housing, repair and maintain homes.

Lenton & Dunkirk

Beeston

• The main motivators for house hunting in Beeston are:
• Had time available to explore options
• Concern no good houses would be left
• Friends started looking
• A much higher percentage (28%) of residents of Beeston live alone in comparison to other UoN

student areas.

• 50% live in accredited properties
• Less Beeston residents (in comparison to areas) say that they felt well communicated with in

relation to letting fees

• According to the Private Sector Stock Condition Survey (2006), Beeston properties have the

highest rate of ‘non-decency’ in the borough of Broxtowe, at 42.8% (non-decency is due to either poor thermal comfort or disrepair)*

Wollaton

• NCC priorities for this area include: clean up and tidy environment around home, lower crime and

anti-social behaviour, increase housing for older people, improve parks and open spaces, repair and maintain homes and make them warmer, increase housing for disabled people with support needs

*http://www.broxtowe.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.ashx?id=21350&p=0

Condition & Repair

• Property condition is one of the biggest concerns for students, as opposed to the management

services provided

• Landlords are failing to complete repairs on time, can be hard to contact and are entering the

property without consent/notice

• Houses are also lacking in two particular safety areas: carbon monoxide detectors and functioning

burglar alarms

• Damp, Condensation & Mould are the most pertinent issues for students - residents of Lenton &

Dunkirk more likely to have experienced issues compared to other student areas

• Warmth - there is a near even split of respondents who do, and do not feel adequately warm in

their own home

• 44.6% of students stated that they purposely stayed longer in warmer buildings rather than going

home

• The NCC recognises the link that is made between negative housing aspects such as damp, cold

and over crowding, with ill health

• It is part of NCC’s future objectives to ‘install energy saving measures and increase the use of

renewable energy sources’

• Where are there particular problems – and are these

landlords accredited?

• Are landlords aware of these issues and are they suitably

responding?

• What legislation is there regarding landlords being

required to address damp, condensation and mould for student welfare purposes?

Condition & Repair