Students scramble for new housing as ‘luxury’ accommodation is reallocated to asylum seekers

Reply to the comment left by Ian Cognito at 01/09/2023 - 12:07
I don't think there's sufficient detail here for anybody to make any judgements about this. I suspect that the most relevant bit of missing detail is the contract between 'Prestige Student Living' (is this some kind of agent or tenant?) and 'Hudd Student Management'. If as the facts appear to suggest 'Prestige Student Living' had not managed to give the landlord 'Hudd Student Management' greater than 50% occupancy a couple of weeks off term-time then it may be that the problem is not the landlord but the agent or tenant.

if the HO is paying even the same £200 a week for these flats it sure beats probably the same price they are paying per DAY for a hotel in London, so yes cheaper for taxpayers (theoretically if you take the stance we are paying the bill anyway) BUT the impact is no longer it seems on just pushing back those complaining they are getting overlooked on existing housing lists....

Now pushing students out? I thought the explosion in posh lux student accommodation in all areas was that the companies are targeting cash rich Chinese students? The Uni's need the higher fees from these students..hence the accommodation appeal.
Asylum seekers in such numbers are going to cause local problems and I am not sure how tolerant locals will be especially when Huddersfield is not the most affluent of areas... time will tell as the asylum numbers aren't going down..

If these students are not coming to fill these rooms and they are let to asylum seekers instead then the Uni's income is going to be impacted too. Its only the housing provider that is going to benefit...

Reply to the comment left by Reluctant Landlord at 01/09/2023 - 12:23
Well...under 50% capacity is under 50% capacity if those numbers are real. It seems to me most students need somewhere they are able to study, that is safe, and affordable on a student grant or loan. I'm not sure how great the demand would be for 'prestige' student living at the University of Huddersfield.

Perhaps both the developer and the landlord overestimated the demand for prestige student accommodation in Huddersfield. As I've no knowledge of the local housing situation in Huddersfield I would have no way of knowing for sure how others needing temporary accommodation will feel about it. But if they've got people in Huddersfield who've been in poorer accommodation than this for years whilst waiting for council properties you can predict a backlash.

The students signed their contract and paid their deposit, so they must have been offered an inducement to void their contract. Otherwise, illegal to cancel.

I hear all the noise about the landlord potentially not filling the development, but that's the risk they take. Personally, I wouldn't build luxury any type of accommodation in Huddersfield.

Of course, the backlash will be against the Home Secretary, but she doesn't micro-manage asylum seeker housing. It's civil servants, and it's not a long stretch to think they are doing this to damage the government. We know their union is paying to mount legal cases to block removals, and we now know the previous head responsible for asylum seekers was anti-government and has just joined Amnesty.

Reply to the comment left by NewYorkie at 01/09/2023 - 14:29
It doesn't say the students had paid their deposit. It says they'd committed to their tenancy agreements, whatever that may mean. Too little detail to know.

But if this is correct:

"The student block......had been promoted as a haven of opulence.....prices up to £200 per week."

Then you can expect a back-lash from people who consider themselves to be disenfranchised or overlooked. And I'm guessing there'd be a fair number of them near Huddersfield.

Reply to the comment left by Beaver at 01/09/2023 - 15:21
They said that they "had returned all payments made to us".

Reply to the comment left by Seething Landlord at 01/09/2023 - 16:27
Which implies a contract had been entered into.

Reply to the comment left by Seething Landlord at 01/09/2023 - 16:27
The truth is we don't know who paid them, how much or when. There just isn't enough detail here to know what went on here. But I can't see any villains.

And it makes me wonder whether renting property to a desperate Home Office has become a more viable option for some landlords than their other alternatives. It's probably now more attractive than renting as a BTL landlord in Scotland under the SNP, possibly now more attractive than renting short-term lets in Edinburgh.

And let's face it...you shouldn't really fall foul of the Right to Rent rules should you?....if the Home Office doesn't know then who does? 🙂

£200 a week in Huddersfield, no wonder there were so few takers.
At least the asylum seekers will have a nice stay.

Reply to the comment left by H MD at 01/09/2023 - 16:42
I'm guessing much better than the average single mum in Huddersfield.