Cost of DCU Accomodation

Cyclonius

Maybe this has been mentioned elsewhere, but it seems that Campus Residences Ltd, the DCU owned company that leases out the campus apartments, is trying to keep the rent the same for the 2011/2012 academic year again:

http://www.dcu.ie/accommodation/current_costs.shtml
http://www.dcu.ie/accommodation/pg_costs.shtml

This is despite the drops in rent everywhere else, and the increasing financial pressure that students are under these days. Granted, people don't have to stay in these apartments, and can rent elsewhere, but the nickel and diming of DCU students is disgraceful in my opinion. Isn't this the type of thing the Student's Union should be trying to do something about?

JemimaPD

I completely agree.

For those who applied for campus accommodation who already live on campus have been given just over 1 week to provide a €300 deposit to secure their room.

Couldn't agree more. The price that you pay for an 'apartment' in Larkfield is absolutely ridiculous. And I use the term apartment loosely at that.

Fine we're paying to live on campus and be near our lectures etc but still, really.... I mean really?

Over €100 a week for the bedsit in Larkfield. Not only this, the fine policy of Campus Res is crazy. Now fair enough, I totally agree with fines being implemented towards people pulling fire alarms and/or being drunk and disorderly. However, reading the guidelines and rules upon talking my room in Larkfield in Sept. this year, I was somewhat over-awed that the first sheet of the booklet was a complete list of possible fines.

Poster on the wall - €20
Bluetack on the wall constitutes repainting the room - €300
Door on the latch - €5

The list goes on. Pointless and innumerable.

Only a few days ago we received an email stating that we are to refrain from making noise in the courtyard at this time due to students studying for their exams. Fair enough.
Yet the same morning I and countless others were awakened by the sound of drilling in the complex. Which could be heard in every apartment in Larkfield. Again....Really?

I think something must be done to combat the monopoly that Campus Res operate under. Alternative pricing is the most logical solution.

That being said....it is with great regret I take my room in Hampstead for next year.

May the fire alarms and fines continue!!

ldxo15wus6fpgm

Deleted User wrote: »

Only a few days ago we received an email stating that we are to refrain from making noise in the courtyard at this time due to students studying for their exams. Fair enough.
Yet the same morning I and countless others were awakened by the sound of drilling in the complex. Which could be heard in every apartment in Larkfield. Again....Really?

This. I'm very near one of the gates which is commonly jumped over by people at all hours of the night. The security don't seem to care. On top of this there's a skip near my room which is emptied very often, and somehow this takes around an hour to do, usually around 7am, waking me up every time. Hopefully hampstead will be a little better.

Noodleworm

Deleted User wrote: »

That being said....it is with great regret I take my room in Hampstead for next year.

May the fire alarms and fines continue!!

If it reassures you Ive never heard a fire Alarm here in Hampstad, Once maybe apart from the tests at the weekend.

Sean-Lugosi

No idea how anybody could ever stand living on campus or in Shanowen. Prices are insane, list of regulations are equally so and the state of the places, like. Plus, 90% of your neighbours are chodes.

And I live in Tallaght. Would much rather commute the M50 every morning.

who is this

Sean-Lugosi wrote: »

No idea how anybody could ever stand living on campus or in Shanowen. Prices are insane, list of regulations are equally so and the state of the places, like. Plus, 90% of your neighbours are chodes.

And I live in Tallaght. Would much rather commute the M50 every morning.

Agreed. Renting with a deposit is supposed to ensure that you return it in the condition you found it in. Since YOU'RE renting it, what you do in the meantime should be your business (including posters, blutack etc.).

I heard once some guy got fined 20€ for a pube on a toilet seat. I think it was probably a joke but you never know...

wildrover50

I totally agree with the need for DCU Campus Res to review their rents
I am a parent with a Ist year student who wants to be on campus next year and have little choice but to pay for their overpriced accomodation

I tried to negotiate a reduction but I might as well talk to the wall
They are a law unto themselves !!
Its a disgrace in this day and age
( I also have a second child going into 3rd year DTI so every cent counts)

Don't get me started on their deposit/fine policy as it is just a means of
earning more revenue
All the 1st years who stay on campus are sitting ducks
Be warned!!

cocoa

wildrover50 wrote: »

I totally agree with the need for DCU Campus Res to review their rents
I am a parent with a Ist year student who wants to be on campus next year and have little choice but to pay for their overpriced accomodation

I tried to negotiate a reduction but I might as well talk to the wall
They are a law unto themselves !!

I sympathise but to be fair, in this situation, they used good business sense. Judging from your post (which isn't much to go on so feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) you had absolutely no intention of going anywhere other than campus res. No matter how much people complain or negotiate if they don't shop around, more importantly if the rooms are always filled, they have absolutely no motivation for lowering rent.

There are other options around the place, there are the two shanowen complexes, there's gateway which is cheaper again and there's the wonderful world of digs and rented accommodation. It's been a while since I checked but I think when I was in campus res I was paying around €400 per month, maybe more. I now live in a rented house with more space (both my own room and common areas), my own garden, closer to bigger shops, still 10 mins from campus and for €325.

Yes, it's terrible the prices are so high, but it really makes you appreciate prices elsewhere and the prices will always be high as long as there are people willing to pay them.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

cocoa wrote: »

I sympathise but to be fair, in this situation, they used good business sense.

The point is that it's out of order that they're exploiting students to make huge yearly profits. Especially with regard to fines etc.

cocoa

Aylin Helpless Theorist wrote: »

The point is that it's out of order that they're exploiting students to make huge yearly profits. Especially with regard to fines etc.

eh? They're "exploiting" adults (except for some first years) who have all the resources they need to avoid this "exploitation".

Sean-Lugosi

Well the point isn't really that the incoming students have the resources at their disposal to avoid exploitation, it's that it's the actual college with the unreasonable rent and extra expenses and regulations, not a soulless business trying to squeeze pennies from whoever they can. For want of a phrase that doesn't make me sound I'm the tag line writer for iRobot, but they're supposed to be on our side.

I guess the argument could be made that it is the most convenient possible location to rent for the college and thereby is the most desirable in that regard and since spaces are limited, the easiest way to deter a huge influx of applications and having to do a big lottery type arrangement is to have the prices quite high, but the ends doesn't justify the means.

They're crap apartments and people should rent elsewhere. And not Shanowen either. Live in Santry and cycle if you have to.

cocoa

Sean-Lugosi wrote: »

Well the point isn't really that the incoming students have the resources at their disposal to avoid exploitation, it's that it's the actual college with the unreasonable rent and extra expenses and regulations, not a soulless business trying to squeeze pennies from whoever they can. For want of a phrase that doesn't make me sound I'm the tag line writer for iRobot, but they're supposed to be on our side.

Ah, I see. So you don't have a problem with what's happening to them (I still think exploitation is a serious stretch of the imagination), but you care who's doing it? Do you think for some reason that the college has money to burn? That it can afford to take less income than possible? Quite aside from which, campus res is not run directly by the college, and is not a university support service, but much closer to a business of its own.

If there were no other options, I would agree that it's exploitation, but there are lots of options and the university is on the students side, there is a fund for helping students who find themselves hard up financially, which I feel is a much better idea than unnecessarily lowering campus res rents...

Sean-Lugosi

Well I was only using 'exploitation' because it was the term being thrown around in most recent posts, I would be more inclined to agree with you that students have the option to live elsewhere as there are plenty of other options.

And I do have a problem with what's happening (see my earlier whiney rant) but surely it's also a point of contention whether it's by a realtor/landlord or the college, albeit via the campus res, which they're actually attending no? I do have the same gripe about the other gated communities for students which practice the same ridiculous regulations and restrictions but I find it a much more bitter pill to swallow when it's DCU's name on it, especially when I'd consider the campus acc. much poorer quality, smaller and still more expensive by a big margin.

cocoa

Sean-Lugosi wrote: »

And I do have a problem with what's happening (see my earlier whiney rant) but surely it's also a point of contention whether it's by a realtor/landlord or the college, albeit via the campus res, which they're actually attending no? I do have the same gripe about the other gated communities for students which practice the same ridiculous regulations and restrictions but I find it a much more bitter pill to swallow when it's DCU's name on it, especially when I'd consider the campus acc. much poorer quality, smaller and still more expensive by a big margin.

Personally, I don't think that's a point of contention at all. The college needs to make an income and there have been huge educations cuts, you're suggesting they lower the rates on campus res apartments, effectively losing money... why? Just as a nice favour to those people who did not bother shopping around? (sorry if that sounds harsh but if you can give me another reason for staying in campus res while also having such a low opinion of it, please do)

If you don't like it, no matter who does it, what is your suggested alternative to the capitalist system? I agree that the noise thing is ridiculous and I agree that the fines are ridiculous, but these people are not helpless. Campus res (and others) get away with treating students like children ... because students let them.

wildrover50

In my opinion DCU Campus Res exploit the fact that most students are "adults" and any dealings of a financial matter can only be dealt with via the student...they hide behind the fact most of them are over 18 so that
they dont have to deal with the parents directly, who, at the the of the day, are paying for the accomodation/deposits etc.

If us parents had 'all the resources they need to avoid this "exploitation"'
then we would not be moaning about it
(not clear what that post was trying to say)
Paying for ours kids education ,whether we can afford it or not, is what parents do.

This DCU Campus Res company has made good profits over the years on
the back of students(or should that be parents) with no tax to pay on those profits as they have charitable status...so I think the word "exploitation" is very apt especially when their staff and other costs are down

cocoa

wildrover50 wrote: »

In my opinion DCU Campus Res exploit the fact that most students are "adults" and any dealings of a financial matter can only be dealt with via the student...they hide behind the fact most of them are over 18 so that
they dont have to deal with the parents directly, who, at the the of the day, are paying for the accomodation/deposits etc.

I really don't follow. Even if the parents are paying for everything, surely it would be in the best interest of the student to learn how to handle things properly as an adult? I really don't think campus res are 'hiding' when they insist on speaking to the person who entered into a contract with them.

wildrover50 wrote: »

If us parents had 'all the resources they need to avoid this "exploitation"'
then we would not be moaning about it
(not clear what that post was trying to say)
Paying for ours kids education ,whether we can afford it or not, is what parents do.

OK, I wasn't clear. When I said students (or parents) had all the resources, I meant other accommodation options. Even if the parent is paying and (heaven forbid) campus res insists on speaking only to the student, what's stopping them from paying (less) for the student to stay somewhere else?

wildrover50 wrote: »

This DCU Campus Res company has made good profits over the years on
the back of students(or should that be parents) with no tax to pay on those profits as they have charitable status...so I think the word "exploitation" is very apt especially when their staff and other costs are down

eh? charitable status? news to me. No one is forcing students to stay there, there are many other options within walking distance, many more within cycling and bus distance, that is why I feel this is not exploitation.

Noodleworm

Theres lots of things going around about how awfull campus res is. But in fairness, we choose to take it.

At times I hate it here, but Ive still taken it three years in a row now.
theres a few advantages. One reason people take it is they have a deal with the Access program, giving those who are in some way disadvantaged with half price, of sometimes even full price off their accommodation for the year (minus deposits) For those who otherwise can't afford college this is a huge help.

One main reason my parents encouraged me to take res was because they didn't want the hassle of dealing with landlords, worrying about rent, moving dates, noise issues, repairs etc. Yeah, things on Res are strict, but it gets done.
Here, Something breaks, I fill in a form and it gets fixed within a few days. Someone near my throwing a party when I need to sleep? I know that security will stop them if it goes past 12.
There is a lot of rules but at least they are clear about them, given good warning before inspections, full lists of exactly how they want the place. dates for payments, date we have to move out by, full time security who can get you a key card if your locked out.

then its just incredibly useful to be so near campus, no worry about busses, free to go to society events at night or stay at the library till closing. Being 5 minutes away from classes.

Anyway, the point is, Yes campus sucks for a variety of reasons, But we know what we're getting ourselves into. Campus Res don't hide what their doing.

orla_dcu

cocoa wrote: »

Personally, I don't think that's a point of contention at all. The college needs to make an income and there have been huge educations cuts, you're suggesting they lower the rates on campus res apartments, effectively losing money... why? Just as a nice favour to those people who did not bother shopping around? (sorry if that sounds harsh but if you can give me another reason for staying in campus res while also having such a low opinion of it, please do)

If you don't like it, no matter who does it, what is your suggested alternative to the capitalist system? I agree that the noise thing is ridiculous and I agree that the fines are ridiculous, but these people are not helpless. Campus res (and others) get away with treating students like children ... because students let them.

Cocoa, Campus Residence Ltd is a company, not own by the university. Therefore NONE of its profits were put back into the university. The students and the greater dcu community do not benefit from the excessive fines and rent.

Additionally, I don't not believe that people rent on campus due to laziness. Ballymun is one of the roughest estates in Europe. There is extremely tight security at night which gives parents and students peace of mind. However due to the HUGE profits campus res. ltd. received last year they are taking advantage of the fact that it the university is situated in an unsafe area and people are willing to pay more to live on campus.

cocoa

Firstly, Greetings from 2011!

orla_dcu wrote: »

Cocoa, Campus Residence Ltd is a company, not own by the university. Therefore NONE of its profits were put back into the university. The students and the greater dcu community do not benefit from the excessive fines and rent.

I apologise if I gave the impression that profits would be given back to the university. I do not believe that was my intention. As I recall, people were suggesting that accommodation should be subsidised by the university, therefore (artificially) reducing the price, which I'm sure you would agree, is a different matter entirely. Now, in this context, wouldn't you agree that the university is strapped for cash, and money could be better spent elsewhere? Even then, I would like to make you aware that some students (access) do get whole or partly subsidised accommodation, which I think is quite a good thing, but I don't think it's necessary for all students.

orla_dcu wrote: »

Additionally, I don't not believe that people rent on campus due to laziness. Ballymun is one of the roughest estates in Europe. There is extremely tight security at night which gives parents and students peace of mind. However due to the HUGE profits campus res. ltd. received last year they are taking advantage of the fact that it the university is situated in an unsafe area and people are willing to pay more to live on campus.

With respect, I view that comment with extreme disbelief. Obviously, I am posting (pseudo) anonymously on the internet, but if I am to be believed, I studied in DCU for four years, and lived in campus res for two of those years. I do not believe that Ballymun is all that rough (please don't link to a study, I don't care, I live nearby) and even if I did, DCU is, strictly speaking, in Glasnevin, and there are plenty of places to rent which are not in Ballymun.

So I think that's nonsense, but even if you think that security is such a big deal, and you think campus res do a good job of security, they still aren't the only secure accommodation. If you are claiming the monopoly lies in having the only accommodation where you don't need to go outside the safe area of the campus, well then I think we're living in different worlds.

adamski8

cocoa, your previous post clearly showed you thought profits went to the college, i have no idea how you can try and back track on that!

unfortunatly with this accomodation being on campus new students think it is owned by the university and they completely rip people off. cant imagine the profit they make in fines

cocoa

adamski8 wrote: »

cocoa, your previous post clearly showed you thought profits went to the college, i have no idea how you can try and back track on that!

unfortunatly with this accomodation being on campus new students think it is owned by the university and they completely rip people off. cant imagine the profit they make in fines

Fair shout! my memory was hazy and I didn't read over it properly. Does that change my point though? The university would still lose / spend money to lower prices, right? If campus residences are to lose money (ok, miss out on profits), well, refer to my previous point on capitalism

I agree with you about the association thing, having clearly assumed myself that they were connected in some way, it would be best if that was made clearer.

Fighting Irish

Supply and demand, hopefully you'll learn it in college

adamski8

Fighting Irish wrote: »

Supply and demand, hopefully you'll learn it in college

not quite........eg
new student from the country renting for the first time, parents pay his rent.
university advertises "great" accommodation on campus.
parents or student dont know anything about dublin bar its "in ballymun isnt in" well then better he is on campus with all that great security away from all that crime :rolleyes:

kind of taking advantage a bit i think, supply and demand is seen in the rental situation outside college, defo not on campus!

but of course they wont lower the rent even if not all the apartments are let, probably just jack up the fines for putting up a poster or not cleaning your oven or some other BS

i dont even know how they are allowed to rent out larkfield "apartments" they arent even apartments, sit on your bed deal for you meals!

ordinary_girl

orla_dcu wrote: »

Ballymun is one of the roughest estates in Europe. There is extremely tight security at night which gives parents and students peace of mind. However due to the HUGE profits campus res. ltd. received last year they are taking advantage of the fact that it the university is situated in an unsafe area and people are willing to pay more to live on campus.

Oh lawl. Ballymun used to be an awful lot worse than it is now, there have been massive improvements in the area, particularly since the flats have been demolished, and the area DCU is in isn't really Ballymun. If Ballymun was that rough no one would even consider going to a university that had Ballymun in its address, but hundreds of students do, I think that tells you something.

wildrover50

There was an article about Irish University campus fines etc. on the front page of the Sunday Times last Sunday (29th April)

Didnt paint any of the Universties in a good light on this topic apart from maybe TCD

(Sorry dont have a link)