Case Summaries
Back to Case SummariesAccommodation - CS112601
Case summary November 2026 | Settled
A postgraduate student entered into a tenancy agreement for a room in provider-owned hall of residence. They collected the room keys the following day. When they went to see the room, they found visible damp, a bad smell and broken items which they recorded on the room’s inventory form. Shortly afterwards, the student asked to cancel their tenancy agreement and did not move in. The keys were handed back, and the student complained to the provider. They said the room did not match the standard and quality they had expected from the provider’s promotional material.
The provider said there was not enough evidence to show that the room was uninhabitable. It didn’t think it had been given the opportunity to resolve the issues identified, which could have been addressed by its maintenance team. The provider said that the student was still liable to pay for the accommodation under their contract. This was because they did not meet the criteria for release from the contract, and they had not pursued other options before requesting to be released, such as asking for a room change.
The student complained to us. They felt it was unfair they were liable for the remainder of the contract given the condition of the room and that they had not occupied it. They did not feel their concerns had been taken seriously or investigated. They said they had not been offered alternative accommodation or given support.
We asked the provider for information about the student’s complaint. After taking the time to gather information for us to review, the provider offered a settlement.
The provider agreed it had not made clear to the student that alternative accommodation could be offered. It also accepted the distinction between inventory reporting and maintenance requests, and the process for making each type of report had not been explained clearly enough.
The student accepted that they were financially liable for the first period of accommodation but did not feel it was fair to hold them liable for the final two terms of the academic year. The provider offered to release the student from liability for those two terms. The student accepted the offer and the case was settled.