The 'Hampstead 4' Campus Res issue.

Noodleworm

This thing just keeps going on on twitter and Id like to hear peoples views.

Four students from Dublin City University are harnessing the power of Twitter to try and save their places on the college campus.

The hashtag #savethehampstead4 has taken off overnight, with the four lads involved managing to get the topic trending near the top of the Irish charts.

The lads had a party on campus and according to them some people gatecrashed the party and damaged a door. DCU decided that this broke the college rules for residents, fined them €3,000 and evicted them from the Hampstead complex.

But the four lads, David Gavin, Danny Kirby, Paul Smith and Steven Gilmore have decided not to take the ruling lying down and have taken to Twitter to spread the word.

A campaign of tweeting as many people as possible and looking for their support seems to have paid off, with Kerry’s Paul Galvin, @pgal10, one of those backing the students.

I know a lot of people on Res have been getting really annoyed at the noise this year, yet we have more people trying to claim partying in college is some kind of human right.
Im not sure what their trying to achieve with a twitter trend though, internet fame?

blahfckingblah

noise was not the issue on this occasion someone turned up uninvited and broke a door,,, or so the story goes

cson

http://joe.ie/news-politics/current-affairs/joes-exclusive-update-on-the-dcu-student-eviction-row-0017885-1

JOE.ie wrote:

JOE has managed to unearth more details about the escalating row between DCU and four students who face eviction over an on-campus party.

After #savethehampstead4 became a Twitter trend overnight, JOE can now bring you more details about the incident.

JOE understands that a party on Tuesday November 15 in the apartment of David Gavin, Danny Kirby, Paul Smith and Steven Gilmore ended sometime after 11. Later that same night two non-residents broke into the complex in an attempt to enter the apartment, damaging the front door of the Hampstead building in the process.

On Wednesday the college authorities sent a letter to the four lads involved advising them to attend a meeting and it was on Friday that they were hit with a bill for €3,000 for damages and an eviction notice for Monday November 21.

The lads managed to obtain an extension until Friday November 25 but the still face losing their accommodation and a massive bill they can’t pay.

The four lads are all from outside Dublin and they face long commutes from the west of Ireland if the eviction is enforced, jeopardising their ability to continue their studies.

JOE understands the lads admit they had the party but they feel the punishment far exceeds the crime and they are now looking at fundraising efforts to help pay the bill.

JOE attempted to contact DCU for a comment on the matter but nobody was available to take our call.

From the sounds of it DCU are trying to make an example of the lads as a warning to others re house parties. I do think it's excessive based on the above if that's what's happened - but as with all these things there is probably more to it.

Attol

How did the gatecrashers get into the apartment building? Don't they need keycards to get in through that.

paddy978

Was the door made out of gold, or where did the 3g fine come out of.

WannabeDolly

It's not DCUs issue, Campus Res is a separate company from DCU.

p1akuw47h5r3it

Ye I got invited to some group about it on Facebook and it says that it has not much to do with DCU but a private company.

blahfckingblah

was talking to one of the lads involved, the door was broken several hours after the party by a non resident

Noodleworm

so how was a connection made to 4/5 residents in 1/6 apartments in the building? if this was just a door issue?

Deckof52

DCU Campus Res is not separate to DCU. All business entities on campus have a bought in clause by the University. As far as I'm aware, although Campus Res is profit based the University can intervene as it is the prime owner.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

Noodleworm wrote: »

so how was a connection made to 4/5 residents in 1/6 apartments in the building? if this was just a door issue?

Because they're the only ones that were having a party in that house on that night so they're clearly 100% responsible according to Mr. Hamilton!

TheChrisD

Attol wrote: »

How did the gatecrashers get into the apartment building? Don't they need keycards to get in through that.

Ringing random buzzers until one of them just opens the door without question. Still happens quite a bit despite all the warnings.

S.Coltons2

If the place was trashed by gatecrashers or intruders, the question should be asked, was campus security doing their jobs? if they were, then they should have a record of what guests were let in that night and that way someone might be held accountable for the damage done?

Kavrocks

S.Coltons2 wrote: »

the question should be asked, was campus security doing their jobs?

Not the question I would be asking.

manlad

S.Coltons2 wrote: »

If the place was trashed by gatecrashers or intruders, the question should be asked, was campus security doing their jobs? if they were, then they should have a record of what guests were let in that night and that way someone might be held accountable for the damage done?

In fairness campus cant stop everybody going into the place all night. They start checkin i.d's around 11.30-12.00. On a busy night with lots of people around can you imagine how many people will have walked through the sportsclub?

These lads had a party and didn't put a limit on who was coming, it was probably a free for all. This kind of s**t is always going to happen. Of course if someone causes damage your always going to say it was an outsider, I used the same excuse in first year when I got a fine. I paid the fine and got on with it.

I know 3,000 is a bit steep but its campus res trying to send a message to other residents. Frankly I wouldn't live on campus again anyway because of the noise levels. Always expect to be awoken from 2-4 in the morning with people coming back from a night out.

ultimately these guys will lose their deposit which is usually around 400, so thats 1600 of the fine paid. Campus res probably won't look for more. There are list of regulations about causing damage and parties so these lads wouldn't have a leg to stand on if they tried getting solicitors involved.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

manlad wrote: »

In fairness campus cant stop everybody going into the place all night. They start checkin i.d's around 11.30-12.00. On a busy night with lots of people around can you imagine how many people will have walked through the sportsclub?

There's a limit of 100 guests on campus in any given night - they hardly ever even get close to that. Plus I know for a fact that half the time security turn a blind eye to lads hopping the fence at night - my room was very near a gate which people commonly jump and nothing was done about it.

I know 3,000 is a bit steep but its campus res trying to send a message to other residents.

Why should these lads have to pay an astronomical figure so campus res can essentially threaten the rest of their tenants? That's a load of bull.

There are list of regulations about causing damage and parties so these lads wouldn't have a leg to stand on if they tried getting solicitors involved.

Just because the terms are in there doesn't mean they are enforceable, if a judge decides they are unfair they can be severed from the lease agreement very easily. Also any fines for damage must be related to the costs incurred - 3k for a door, even with an electromagnet lock - is f*cking ridiculous. That's the price of a decent enough 2nd hand car. The eviction can also be reviewed by a tenancy board and if they did review it it would most likely be overturned.

Kavrocks

Laurel Tall Back wrote: »

3k for a door, even with an electromagnet lock - is f*cking ridiculous.

You should go price the door before making comments like that.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

Kavrocks wrote: »

You should go price the door before making comments like that.

I have. between €50 - 300 for a new lock, if it even needs replacing which it most likely doesn't, about 400 for a fire door. So unless the other 2300 is for the labour to put it up then they are being fleeced.

I'd imagine that it isn't all for the door. How about fire extinguishers? Damage to the apartment? Lights in the building? Rubbish outside? Noise fine? Breaking the rules of the lease (that as adults) they signed? "Wrecklessly" putting guests in danger? And then round it all up with a slap on the hand fine?

Though it is a bit steep, unfortunately they did break the rules...excusing the door, for fire safety alone, DCU health and safety would have lost their ****...

3000 / 4 = 750

So, they probably fined them each €200 for the door. So that's down to 550 now...add in loss of deposit which is 300, that brings it down to 250 each. Add in the rest of it, and it isn't too bad...do they lose the first payment that they made on campus?

Kavrocks

Laurel Tall Back wrote: »

I have. between €50 - 300 for a new lock

I've been involved with changing some doors elsewhere on campus and the expected costs were a lot higher than that and because of the exorbitant price the change did not go ahead.

manlad

Laurel Tall Back wrote: »

I have. between €50 - 300 for a new lock, if it even needs replacing which it most likely doesn't, about 400 for a fire door. So unless the other 2300 is for the labour to put it up then they are being fleeced.

so when are you getting evicted then???

Campus Res have a presentation at the start of the year that goes through all the regulations, it is a health and safety thing at the end of the day. People have been broken into in the past. The mag lock on the door are important and believe me they are extremely expensive. The company that does work on campus is a facilities management firm and will charge crazy prices by the hour.

You havn't been to court much if you think a judge would take pity on students.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

Kavrocks wrote: »

I've been involved with changing some doors elsewhere on campus and the expected costs were a lot higher than that and because of the exorbitant price the change did not go ahead.

I don't see how it could cost more than 30 or 400 quid for a new lock. Unless they want the security standards of a bank, which they obviously don't seeing as people routinely get into the complex at night simply by hopping a fence.

Another example of exorbitant fines - 300 to paint a small bedroom. I know for a fact that that price is f*cking ridiculous.

manlad wrote: »

so when are you getting evicted then???

You havn't been to court much if you think a judge would take pity on students.

I'm not getting evicted, I've checked the price before because a fella I know broke a larkfield main door off it's hinges last year.

I'm a law student btw. Being a student is a factor the court will nearly always look favourably upon.

Laurel Tall Back

Laurel Tall Back wrote: »

I'm a law student btw. Being a student is a factor the court will nearly always look favourably upon.

Unfortunately not in this case I reckon. They signed a lease and have, probably, signed a document saying that they were present at a fire safety talk (a number of times depending if they lived on campus before) which dealt with parties and why you are not allowed them. I'm not a law student but I reckon that they would still be treated as mature adults and thus based on everything, wouldn't have a leg to stand on.

I genuinely feel bad for the lads, it isn't a nice thing to have a party and end up getting evicted and fined only a quarter of the way through their lease...but they aren't doing themselves any good by publicising it...I can't imagine it will do them any favours for accomodation in the future or for job applications. They should have just accepted what happened, learned from their mistakes and moved on...

ldxo15wus6fpgm

Lads, just because something is written into a lease agreement does not mean it is hard law and 'that's the way it goes' etc. There is room for a judge to turn around to campus res and say this lease agreement is unfair to the tenants especially as they are young adults, and this decision is unfair because there is no relation between the damage caused and the punishment given - the punishment should be proportionate. Eviction and 3k over a door is most certainly not proportionate.

manlad

Laurel Tall Back wrote: »

Lads, just because something is written into a lease agreement does not mean it is hard law and 'that's the way it goes' etc. There is room for a judge to turn around to campus res and say this lease agreement is unfair to the tenants especially as they are young adults, and this decision is unfair because there is no relation between the damage caused and the punishment given - the punishment should be proportionate. Eviction and 3k over a door is most certainly not proportionate.

Around 20 DCU students were taken to court this time last year for having no tv license in their house on campus. I know cos I was in the courtroom.

20 students were fined in excess of €500. DCU had it in their regulations that students must a tv license, they have similar regulations for damage to property. The judge imposed the fines upon seeing the regulations.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

manlad wrote: »

I know cos I was in the courtroom.

20 students were fined in excess of €500. DCU had it in their regulations that students must a tv license, they have similar regulations for damage to property. The judge imposed the fines upon seeing the regulations.

Great for you. What does that have to do with this? That's a pretty standard fine, payable to the state, for essentially evasion of a tax. The judge imposed the fine because it's the law that you must have a tv license. This is a fine to a private company, for a private matter, for a ridiculous figure. Have you noticed that 3000 is 6 times 500? Were they evicted because of that?

manlad

Laurel Tall Back wrote: »

Great for you. What does that have to do with this? That's a pretty standard fine, payable to the state, for essentially evasion of a tax. The judge imposed the fine because it's the law that you must have a tv license. This is a fine to a private company, for a private matter, for a ridiculous figure. Have you noticed that 3000 is 6 times 500? Were they evicted because of that?

I mentioned this case as an example of judges not taking pity on students.

€500 euro is a big fine imposed on a student if they live in larkfield, considering hundreds of students share 2/3 tv's and a couple of students get singled out to pay the fine?

DCU RES also failed to comment on the case or get involved so the fines were imposed.

thecornflake

This has to be a joke.

They had a party, damage was done. Then they complain that they are getting kicked out and fined ? Really ? Get a f**king grip, college is for study not partying. Clearly if that is their attitude they shouldn't be given the chance to go to college. Assholes that give students a bad name, I'm sick of them.

phantom_lord

thecornflake wrote: »

college is for study not partying.

Partying is a standard part of most balanced people's lives, whether they're students or not.

The people in Hampstead complaining about noise, surely that's something you're going to expect when you're living in student accommodation with hundreds of people?

thecornflake

phantom_lord wrote: »

Partying is a standard part of most balanced people's lives, whether they're students or not.

The people in Hampstead complaining about noise, surely that's something you're going to expect when you're living in student accommodation with hundreds of people?

I totally agree that partying is a part of people's lives, who doesn't like a good time ? What I am saying is it shows how much they seemed to care about their college if they were willing to do that in on campus accommodation.

They were well aware of the rules, if they wanted a good time why not go out somewhere ? Nubar ? town ? why annoy other people ? As usual it makes out in the media that students = trouble & partying, especially with all these fee protests and what not it gives an image of immaturity and carelessness which I am sick of being apart of.

I will admit that the punishment is a bit heavy if it is true that they personally did not damage the door but they were still causing a disruption which lead to it becoming damaged.

Noodleworm

We don't expect noise to be that bad on campus, as we have that strict no noise policy in place during the night.
We all sign lease when we move in saying we know the rules and we accept the punishment if we break them.
Essentially parties are just not allowed on campus, friends over and a few drinks, acceptable, but not full blown parties like these lads were having.
I heard from one resident of the same building that they had to push past a crowd just to get to their apartment. I also heard that there was a lot more damage than just that door.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

manlad wrote: »

I mentioned this case as an example of judges not taking pity on students.

€500 euro is a big fine imposed on a student if they live in larkfield, considering hundreds of students share 2/3 tv's and a couple of students get singled out to pay the fine?

DCU RES also failed to comment on the case or get involved so the fines were imposed.

500 is a pretty standard fine. There's no need to take pity on anyone there because it's a tv license, and it's an initial judgement, an post had not fined them anything - this case has already been decided upon by campus res and the judge will decide that their fine is unreasonable. This is damage to property, they're two completely different things. Those students were fined because they had their own tvs in their bedrooms. I don't see why campus res would get involved, it's an issue between the occupant and an post.

thecornflake

Noodleworm wrote: »

I heard from one resident of the same building that they had to push past a crowd just to get to their apartment. I also heard that there was a lot more damage than just that door.

There's always more to the story then these lads will tell you. I assume they were first years ? No offence to first years but I wouldn't imagine people like this would last into second third or fourth years.

Sorry if I'm wrong on all this as I don't have twitter so I didn't see this campaign thing, does anyone have a link ?

Pygmalion

thecornflake wrote: »

There's always more to the story then these lads will tell you. I assume they were first years ? No offence to first years but I wouldn't imagine people like this would last into second third or fourth years

I believe they're all second years.
Athletic Therapy and Training; Sport Science and Health; Business Studies and Applied Language and Intercultural Studies.
I'll make no comments as to how easy it is to "last" in these courses >.>

I could be wrong though, this is just from a quick search of their names.

lithiumoxide

They sounds like plebs in fairness.

EDIT: Plebbery confirmed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mRP8cFG6qxA

Pygmalion

lithiumoxide wrote: »

They sounds like plebs in fairness.

EDIT: Plebbery confirmed: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=mRP8cFG6qxA

Aye, nothing of value was lost.

manlad

Just looking at the facebook page people that are criticising them are getting a lot of abuse. Just shows the maturity of the whole thing

Link

Note: you will need a facebook account to view the page

Kavrocks

lithiumoxide wrote: »

They sounds like plebs in fairness.

Sounds like they got what they deserved.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

manlad wrote: »

Just looking at the facebook page people that are criticising them are getting a lot of abuse. Just shows the maturity of the whole thing

Link

Note: you will need a facebook account to view the page

The people giving abuse have basically nothing to do with the 4 lads, and are taking the piss. Just shows how much research you do into stuff like this and how much cop on you have.

manlad

Laurel Tall Back wrote: »

The people giving abuse have basically nothing to do with the 4 lads, and are taking the piss. Just shows how much research you do into stuff like this and how much cop on you have.

I'll repeat my question from before, when are you getting evicted? I'm making the point by having that page there and people who are associated with it giving the abuse does not help their situation. And they are friends of the guys that are writing the insulting comments, to girls especially.

Look I can see your standing up for your mates, But I myself along with many other people hope these lads get no sympathy and sufficient punishment.

Kavrocks

manlad wrote: »

I'll repeat my question from before, when are you getting evicted?

Exactly what I was thinking. munkymanmatt what exactly is your vested interest in this? You aren't much better than the people giving abuse on the Facebook page when you do it here.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

My interest in this is that I'm absolutely sick of Campus Res extorting students like this. They are getting much more than sufficient punishment, that's the whole issue. Again, they have nothing to do with the 4 lads, they are simply trolling. Why is that so hard to understand? And how have I been abusive? I've simply proven you wrong and you don't like that.

manlad

Laurel Tall Back wrote: »

My interest in this is that I'm absolutely sick of Campus Res extorting students like this. They are getting much more than sufficient punishment, that's the whole issue. Again, they have nothing to do with the 4 lads, they are simply trolling. Why is that so hard to understand? And how have I been abusive? I've simply proven you wrong and you don't like that.

This has nothing to do with proving people wrong. Look I lived on the campus for 3 years and at times have felt exploited. I received an 80 euro fine when I drop the fire extinguisher in my house, it didn't go off but somehow all the pressure went. As well numerous lockouts when you have to pay to get back into your own house.

The point I'm making is that these guys signed a lease which lists all regulations fines etc. once this is signed you adhere to campus res rules. It's unfortunate that if it is the case that a random outsider did damage the door, but these guys left themselves open for trouble the minute they decided to have a party. Everyone knows security and campus res do not allow full blown parties, they don't mind small gatherings as long as the noise levels and crowd aren't out of control. This is up to the residents themselves to control.

Dcu campus res have some **** rules and sometimes too much authority but if these things wern't in place it would be an absolute free for all. Sometimes if you want to have massive parties all the time it's best to live off campus where you will only have to deal with one landlord and not a company.

Kavrocks

Laurel Tall Back wrote: »

My interest in this is that I'm absolutely sick of Campus Res extorting students like this. They are getting much more than sufficient punishment, that's the whole issue. Again, they have nothing to do with the 4 lads, they are simply trolling. Why is that so hard to understand? And how have I been abusive? I've simply proven you wrong and you don't like that.

Then take that up with DCU/SU/CRC or Campus Res.

I feel the punishment is fair and deserving and so do many others but likewise there are people who feel it is not fair and deserving. There is still no need to get so heated about it.

Its not hard to understand that they are trolling but as manlad said

manlad wrote: »

they are friends of the guys that are writing the insulting comments.

You have not proven anybody wrong, you have stated your opinion that is all. I've no problem with that.

I was referring to

Laurel Tall Back wrote: »

how much cop on you have.

Sod'o swords

That facebook page for them is ridiculous, never seen such tools on it in my life.

lithiumoxide

Agreed. You can't sign an agreement to follow certain rules, break those rules, and then cry about it.

These lads need to cop on and get a grip on reality.

Hauk

Throw them out. I'm sure there are plenty of people who need the room and will appreciate it. These people are not people I want to see with degrees.

Green Hand Guy

Hauk wrote: »

Throw them out. I'm sure there are plenty of people who need the room and will appreciate it. These people are not people I want to see with degrees.

Was pretty much going to come on to say this, but Hauk beat me to it. Plenty of people apply for campus res and don't get in, and I'm sure the majority of them would be more deserving than these knobs.

tonedef

Well they seem like a lovely bunch of lads......

Link

Pygmalion

tonedef wrote: »

Well they seem like a lovely bunch of lads......

Link

The text that precede the image in that post was stolen word for word from a post I made on reddit

Now I know how Lars Ulrich feels when someone downloads Master of Puppets.

Fiftysix

These guys are morons. If you have a party you are responsible for what happens, it is not hard to keep an eye on things at a party tbh. It must have taken some amount of work to destroy one of those doors, and I find it surprising that not one of them tried to stop what was happening.

The alternative to this fee is coming up against the disciplinary committee does anyone know if they have been called to it?

whatever they get they deserve it, it's time to grow up boys.