Students accuse Smarter Housing of false advertising

Smarter Housing, a letting agency that specialises in student accommodation, has been increasingly criticised by students for alleged misconduct. The Welfare Office has received an average of seven complaints a week, and one student is taking the agency to court.

Set up in 2005 by Adam Arnold, a Warwick graduate, the agency promises students “only the best student accommodation… the nicest houses, pre-arranged gas, electric & internet, exclusive student deals”. They advertise no letting fees, free broadband internet if the house has the capability, offers and discounts and 24/7 management of the property.

Yet, some students have complained about false advertising. This year a number of tenants say they were misled into paying higher rent, had to wait up to seven weeks for their internet to be connected or have objected to the condition in which they found their houses upon their arrival.

Specific student complaints about Smarter Housing range from issues of internet connection to Vicky Milton, a translation studies certificate postgraduate, who has filed papers to take Smarter Housing to court. As a postgraduate student she was not able to visit the house last year, but decided to rent it based on photos on the Smarter Housing Website.

Upon her arrival at the start of term she claims she was informed that a squatter had broken in the week before. She further alleges the house was a mess with the kitchen was covered in grease and keys were missing since the break-in. In general, she says, the house did not look like it had been cleaned since the year before. Vicky alleges that during the night she became “paranoid for my own safety” because she thought she heard an intruder upstairs.

The following day she moved out and sent Smarter Housing a two-page missive of all the problems in the house that needed fixing. They did not respond with what Vicky deemed adequate speed, and she ended her tenancy. She spent arrivals week looking for new accommodation. Vicky has recently filed papers to take Smarter Housing to court, as they have not returned her first two month’s rent.

Adam Arnold says he returned Vicky’s deposit, but cannot return her rent because it is at the landlord’s discretion. He contends that, “In our opinion Cromwell Lane was perfectly fit for occupation at the time when Vicky Milton took up residence. As such, we believe the landlord is right to refuse any refund of rent paid in advance” He added, “I have been in touch with the other occupiers of the property, who moved in during the same week as Ms. Milton and they have all confirmed they are happy with the state of the property.” Originally attracted to the letting agency because its CEO was an ex-student, Vicky Milton feels misled by the agency; “Why should we be expected to put up with it just because we’re students?” She has been forced to take up a temping job to cover the costs of extra rent and feels this, coupled with the stress she has been under, has made her academics suffer. She hopes that her case will mean “future students don’t get done over.”

Another group of students, tenants of a property on Clarendon Avenue, go so far as to say that Smarter Housing “scammed us”. They agreed to pay £83 a week each, £8 more than the last tenants, based on what they thought was the promise of an addition to the house. In an alleged email between themselves and Arnold regarding inclusion of the extra room in their tenancy agreement, the students say that Arnold wrote “there is the issue of offering this to you in good faith. We are only commenting on the extension as we are aware it will happen – we couldn’t go around boasting random extensions to properties if they weren’t going to happen as we’d regularly find ourselves in trouble for false advertising.”

Arnold denies that he sent this e-mail, saying “I entirely refute the comments you presented in an e-mail from the tenants of Clarendon Avenue.”

Tenants of another Smarter Housing property, who wish to remain anonymous, claim they had similar promises had similar promises made to them, which were then not followed through. They claim to have been informed that their property would be renovated and refurbished with an open kitchen plan and an upstairs toilet to be added. “We agreed to pay £340 per month, about £100 more than the average accommodation, due to the promises that were made to us.” Instead in an audit of the property conducted upon their arrival, they allege there had been no changes, but “there were many security issues” which reportedly kept them from being able to move in.

One of their claimed serious security problems was that they were unable to lock a door between the property and a pub next door. Smarter Housing have since provided some new furnishings and the security issue has been resolved. However, the rent has not been reduced. Arnold was unable for comment because he now refuses to speak to the _Boar_, and referred our request to his solicitor.

The tenants of Clarendon Avenue also claim that their boiler was unsafe. In a letter to Smarter Housing, one of the tenant’s fathers, a gas engineer and consultant, wrote, “the installation has many safety issues that could put the occupants in danger”. Arnold responded, “I have been assured by the original installer and an independent contractor that the installation was in no way unsafe.” CORGI are currently investigating the complaint about the property but said the boiler had been replaced before they were able to inspect it.

A house on Willes Road were waiting seven weeks for their internet connection to be set up. They were among three or four properties who were waiting until reading week for various reasons. On the second day of their occupancy, a former tenant visited the house saying he was there to retrieve his router. The tenants complied, only to be informed the router belonged to the house, not the former occupiers. Smarter Housing then went about finding them another router, but because of problems with British Telecom, they eventually switched to Virgin Media. This is what Arnold explains resulted in the delay.

However, the tenants believe the router did belong to the previous tenants, as Arnold did not know the password or the details, and say it was an attempt to find a “cheap way around things”.

Arnold says there is only one property remaining that has yet to receive internet on Clapham Terrace and this is due to a fault in BT’s service line.

Numerous students also complained about the state of their houses upon arrival. Many were not in the condition they expected, having not being cleaned since the last occupants. Arnold explained, “We accept that a small number of our properties were not cleaned prior to the new tenancy agreements commencing on 1st September 2008. None of these would have been considered uninhabitable but I accept such a scenario reflects very badly on us as a letting agency. The issue arose as one of our clients offered to do all cleaning personally, to take pressure away from me at the time of celebrating the birth of my first child and taking some time to honeymoon with my wife.”

He continued, “We were notified of the situation three days prior to the commencement of the new term however managed to clean fifty per cent of the effected properties before tenants arrived..The remaining properties were cleaned within a further seven days.” When pressed on the issue of compensation, he said tenants should send in a written complaint and he would liaise with the landlord. Arnold puts most of his problems down to troublesome landlords and an unclear line between his responsibilities and that of the landlords.” In some cases, tenants will complain to or about Smarter Housing even when their property is managed directly by the landlord. In situations where there is a dispute we will try to rectify to the best of our ability, but this is not always possible.”

All the current tenants with whom the _Boar_ had direct contact, were unhappy with the state of their properties. This amounts to almost thirty students. Despite efforts to contact Arnold’s examples of happy tenants, they have yet to come forward.

Arnold claims he occasionally gets a bad reputation because he goes “the extra mile” and takes on responsibilities that are not technically his own. One example he gives is of “a tenant was refused blinds in his bedroom, which the landlord justified by stating there were in fact three spare bedrooms in the property, all with curtains. We have arranged and paid for some cheap blinds to be fitted and are now attempting to recover said expenditure from the landlord.”

Adam says next year the divide between his responsibilities will be clearer “For the coming year, 2009/2010, we will make it clear prior to any agreements being signed exactly where responsibility for management lies.”

The Students’ Union Welfare Officer, Steph Jones, commented, “The Student Advice Centre has received a number of complaints about Smarter Housing and we do not currently list Smarter Housing on any publications that are given out to students.”

The Warwick District Council has also received complaints about the agency. Paul Hughes, Senior Environmental Health Officer for the Council, said, “It is fair to say we have received some complaints about this agency, more particularly to do with conditions of properties, but these have to be taken in context and the conduct of the owners of the properties also has to be considered, because usually their consent is required to carry out works.”