I am very proud to live in a city that is governed by a council with such a strong anti-poverty agenda. York’s shortage of affordable housing is no secret and it remains one of the main issues in the fight against poverty in our city.
In week 4 of this term, every student at the University of York will have the opportunity to vote on whether YUSU should consider creating a lettings agency. It is a vote that will have important ramifications for York’s anti-poverty agenda as well as the student lettings process. Indeed, it is a popular motion and nobody is running a NO campaign against the idea proposed by the Socialist Society. However, after reading through the proposal in detail, I think it is a terrible idea.
According to the motion, the YUSU Letting Agency would magically reduce letting costs, guarantee better accommodation for students, not be run for profit, remain accountable and transparent to the student body, and be financially viable for the Union. You may have noticed some problems already.
Firstly, how would the YUSU Letting Agency be financially viable but not pursue profits? YUSU is a cash-strapped ‘charity’ that would not be able to keep this promise if the motion were to pass. It is a nice idea and I appreciate the sentiment behind it. Landlords treat students like shit all over the UK and maintenance loans should not be vaporized by astronomical rents. Even so, the YUSU Letting Agency would have to be a business that pursues profit, just like the widely hated agencies that operate on campus. I understand it’s “just a vote about a feasibility study”, but still, why waste the money?
Secondly, the motion does not explain how it could reduce letting costs for students and guarantee better quality accommodation. More for less, it always sounds nice. However, landlords are not going to agree to a scheme that makes them less money. It would be irrational. Even if the YUSU Letting Agency chose to subsidise rents with money YUSU does not have, the guarantee of better quality accommodation remains an empty promise. Good landlords, of which there are many in the York area, will continue to maintain their high standards and will gladly sign up to the YUSU Letting Agency. The nasty landlords will simply continue to take advantage of the demand for student houses in York and nothing will change.
The motion’s biggest flaw, however, is its failure to engage with the wider picture. The university’s poorly considered expansion is perpetuating the lack of affordable housing in York. Students use up the cheap housing, creating student ghettos that are uncomfortable places for the few residents who manage to obtain the other cheap homes. York City Council are so concerned by this problem that they have implemented a rule that prevents more than 20% of homes in an area being occupied by students. They cite it as the number one problem in the fight for affordable housing for York’s poorest residents.
This problem is not going away and creating a YUSU Lettings Agency completely misses the point. Our student body is expanding and they will all need a place to stay after their first year accommodation ‘guarantee’ has expired.
If YUSU and our accommodation services were really serious about reducing letting costs and guaranteeing better accommodation for its students, they would focus on building more affordable on-campus accommodation and engage with the Council, York St John and local letting companies instead of supporting a scheme that will only make poverty worse in York as a whole.
1. It’s not solve-all policy
2. That’s bloody obvious and the socialist society haven’t posited it as such
3. But student property in york is let largely through a very small number of letting agencies who frequently make what appear to be unwarranted increases in letting fees –
4. As such it’s not a crazy idea to want to have an alternative letting agency over which students have some control
5. It could charge fees necessary to meet it’s costs and not more, making it self funding after the initial start up costs, and insist upon housing standards determined by students through YUSU
6. If you think that more action needs to be taken by the university or council to reduce rents, increase competition or supply in the student housing market in York, then it’s better to get involved in campaigning towards that rather than sniping at what is an incremental but positive measure
It’s important to correct the above for clarity, the motion is not start a letting agency, if the referendum passes YUSU will develop a feasibility study and business plan for a letting agency. A letting agency will only be created if the plan can:
Reduce lettings costs for students;
Guarantee better quality accommodation for students;
Be open and honest about fees and process with all tenants, prospective tenants and guarantors;
Not be run for a profit;
Is clearly accountable and transparent to the student body;
Be financially viable for the Union.
In addition to this, the 20% cap referred to above is, I believe, referring to the Article 4 Directive that has already been brought in on 20 April 2012 and is currently up for review, more info: http://www.york.gov.uk/info/200174/planning_and_building_control/685/confirmation_of_an_article_4_direction
I would encourage people to come along to the referendum debate next Wednesday to hear all sides: https://www.facebook.com/events/608968849145713/?fref=ts
Why do you put the debate on a Wednesday, a time of the week when roughly 800 of the most active members of the student body are out on socials?
All I know is that I paid as much for 52 weeks in a nice double bedded house incl bills last year as I did for a shitty room in Halifax for 39 weeks in first year.
The less control the Uni has to set the housing costs seems like a good idea to me.
The Uni and the Union are different things…
1) You’re confusing ‘not for profit’ with ‘lose money’. Most societies are run non profit including Vision I would assume. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit_organization
2) Rents aren’t ‘subsidised’. The agency would remove the hidden admin fees and ridiculous deposit amounts to reduce overall cost.
3) The letting agency will be hallmark of reputable landlords. Allowing students to clearly define landlords who are good. As you said there will still be bad landlords but it will be in a landlord’s best interest to meet the YUSU standard.
4) The agency is not creating more houses to rent. It is helping to reduce the cost of house. My entering the market as a competitor with a better offering than current businesses it will help lower the costs of the market as a whole.
This weird myth that it will stop poor people getting homes is unfounded. It actually may do the opposite. If the YUSU letting agency can bring down the price of competitors, through offering a better, cheaper service, not only students but the general public will benefit.