The University library continues to rake it in from slack borrowers and still tops the national table of fine collecting, Leeds Student has learnt.
In March we revealed how Leeds collected a staggering £360,000 from late returners in the academic year 07/08, about £12 for every student. Comparable nationwide data from a year earlier showed that Leeds beat closest rival Manchester to the top of the fines table by over £100,000. Manchester students would be handing over just £5 each on average.
We can now expose how the gap between the two table-topping unis last year grew to a whopping £160,000.
Claims that the cash flow from borrowers had fallen this year were met with sums that remained sky high, with a fall of just 9.5 per cent. The total fund from August to February still stood at a shocking £144,415, four times the amount fined by neighbouring uni Sheffield over the same period.
University Librarian and Keeper of the Brotherton Collection Margaret Coutts defended the fees in our original investigation, saying that decisions made over fines were “student led”.
The original spike in fines from 06/07 to 07/08 was put down to a threshold rise, which allowed borrowers to obtain higher fines before having lending privileges removed.
“The threshold was originally introduced in consultation with students to prevent their borrowing being blocked too rapidly when using our self-service lending facilities in the evening,” Coutts said.
While the figures for the current year have dipped, they still represent a significant income from students who are already paying £3000 a year tuition fees with the results once more calling into question the fining system. While the Library maintains that “the sole purpose of Library fines is to prevent individuals from keeping books for unreasonably long periods and so disadvantage others who need to use them” the significant amounts repeatedly collected suggest the deterrent strategy is not working, with Leeds collecting far more than similar sized unis.
Leeds Student placed Freedom of Information requests with nearly all Russell Group universities, asking for the total amounts collected in fines by their libraries for 07/08 and for August 2008 to the current date. The responses saw Leeds clearly out in front.
For the academic year completed last summer Leeds received £359,229 in fines, followed by Manchester with £198,286.11. Nottingham, which houses the same number of students as Leeds collected just half as much in fines, with the total standing at £172,446. After this came Sheffield with £110,919; Liverpool received £106,059.93; Bristol collected £102,115; York took £99,331; and Birmingham claimed £98,357.93.
Leeds’ figures for the current year are equally as eye-opening. From August 08 to February 09 Leeds received £144,415 in library fines while from August 08 to March 09 Manchester collected £109,174.44 - 30 per cent less. Over the same period Nottingham took £74,893; Liverpool, £58,334.54; Bristol, £47,463; Birmingham, £47,115.84; York, £38,531; and Sheffield, £33,490.
The University of Southampton, the establishment Leeds University VC Michael Arthur attended as an undergraduate, failed to respond to the request and is now the subject of an internal review.
Originally published in Leeds Student on May 15 2009
Friday, 15 May 2009
Friday, 8 May 2009
The house that Zaman can't build
Demolition job: Residents were in uproar over Tariq Zaman's 'grand' designsNews that the landlord who legally owes thousands in unreturned deposits has been told he can't build his own palace is music to the ears of his former tenants.
Rogue landlord Tariq Zaman, former director of Providence Properties, has been refused planning permission to build a new luxury home in Adel due to the grand scale of its design.
Zaman, who currently has 17 County Court Judgements against his name, had applied to Leeds City Council for the go-ahead to demolish an existing four-bedroom dwellling on Dunstarn Drive and replace the 70s construct with a five-bedroom detached property complete with triple garage.
Zaman has been attempting to erect a new building on the site since 2006, having five different designs either rejected or withdrawn over the period.
According to Council public records obtained by Leeds Student, Zaman’s would-be palace was refused planning permission by the Local Planning Authority on the grounds that it “fails to have sufficient regard to the character and appearance of its surroundings”. The papers also detail how the proposal’s “innapropriate volume, scale, massing and design” would make the finished building “incongruous in its setting” leaving it the “dominant” feature in the area’s landscape and therefore “detrimental to the streetscene”.
It appears a resident backlash helped guide the Council’s decision, with 23 letters of objection from those living nearby being lodged. The complaints aired included suggestions that the proposed house is “out of character” with the area, that the scale and proportions put forward are “too excessive” and that the new build would result in the loss of an “attractive habitat, mature shrubs, hedges and trees”.
In an ironic twist, the house next door to Zaman’s property had its own planning permission granted a week after his latest bid was rejected, with construction work already underway.
Tariq Zaman’s dealings have been under the media spotlight since 2007 when he and Providence Properties - the letting agent he was listed as a director of - were accused of unfairly witholding an estimated £70,000 worth of students’ deposits.
17 separate households have taken him to court and won their cases, with judges ordering Zaman to pay the money back. In an episode of Watchdog aired in November last year Zaman brazenly dismissed the court’s rulings as ‘meaningless’ and to this date nothing has been returned.
Zaman was also in the headlines in February when he was implicated as being involved in the opening of the Student Property Shop, a new letting agent located in the same premises as Providence Properties, despite the owner denying any knowledge of who he was.
Tariq Zaman was unable to be contacted for comment.
Rob Damaio, Community Officer at LUU and campaigner for the return of deposits, was pleased with the decision, however it came about. “Having his planning refused is great news,” Rob said. “Though it was done for reasons of aesthetics, it does mean that Tariq is not going to be able to live a grand lifestyle, in a five bedroom mansion, whilst many tenants are still owed hundreds of pounds.”
Meanwhile, the Student Advice Centre has closed the book on Rory Aitken, the landlord who initially refused to pay back £30,000 worth of deposits to tenants. Aitken, dubbed ‘The Ginger Conman’ by the Daily Mirror, was the target of numerous campaigns and Leeds Student articles over the previous academic year.
Andrea Kerslake, Housing Specialist at the Advice Centre, was pleased with the figure eventually secured. “I have just closed the final Aitken deposit case and we obtained £37,464.08,” said Kerslake. “All but a handful of people got at least something back from their deposit. We would have liked the figure to have been higher but it is some £37,000 more than he was preparing to give back at the start. Thanks to everyone who helped highlight the issue.”
The news on Zaman and Aitken comes as The Association of Residential Letting Agents (ARLA) announces it is introducing a licensing scheme for its UK members and a code of practice for letting agents.
Espe Fuentes, a lawyer for independent advice group Which?, said: “We receive many calls from tenants who have issues with their landlords. Most are about poor living conditions and problems with landlords still not putting deposits into the deposit scheme. ARLA’s licensing system is certainly a step in the right direction to offer greater protection for tenants.
“At a minimum, we’d like to see all letting agents and landlords required to join a compulsory complaints scheme. Many people have suffered for too long at the hands of unscrupulous landlords and letting agents - it’s time to separate the wheat from the chaff.”
Originally published in Leeds Student on May 8 2009
Saturday, 2 May 2009
Irish PM legal battle causes resident woe
The Prime Minister of Ireland is at the centre of a dispute over the management of Carr Mills, the Leeds University halls of residence, which is having an effect on maintenance repairs at the complex and causing distress to residents.
Brian Cowen, the Taoiseach, is a member of an Irish consortium that owns apartments in the complex, which has become embroiled in a legal wrangle with the freeholders of the site located in Meanwood.
Among the accusations levied at the Irish owners, The Carr Mills Partnership, by Adderstone Group, the freeholders, is that they are illegally sub-letting the properties to the University. Adderstone are also threatening to take Mr Cowen and his fellow investors to court over non-payment of £100,000 in rent and management fees.
Over Easter a clutch of Irish papers reported on the developments with the Times revealing that Adderstone Group has written to Mr Cowen and his colleagues informing them: “Contrary to the terms of your leases you have sub-let without authority to the University of Leeds.”
According to the paper, Adderstone see this as “an irredeemable breach of covenant” and have told the investors legal action and repossession of property is a real possibility.
The Irish consortium bought the apartments from the developers of Carr Mills in 2005 with a view to sub-letting the apartments the University, maintaining management rights during this time. But formal written consent to go ahead with the letting was not recorded.
When the developer then sold to Adderstone in 2007 this discrepancy quickly became apparent.
Importantly, the new freeholders also took over management rights from the consortium. The Irish owners were keen to keep hold of this aspect of their investment, as it can be quite lucrative with managers charging high fees to residents for the upkeep of communal areas.
In late April, The Sunday Times reported how a student became trapped in a lift in one of the blocks while the emergency phone used to dial for help was dead. When Adderstone sent workmen out they discovered the Irish owners had changed the locks.
The inability for the freeholders to get into the property they manage proved the catalyst for the legal case launch, with the dispute becoming public in the last few weeks.
The company says that it has been trying to recover £100,000 in unpaid management fees and ground rent from the 38 investors who own the 48 apartments in the development, accumulated since it began managing the complex in late 2007.
Throughout this time the two companies have been arguing over who should maintain to buildings, leading to delays in repairs and upkeep. The disruption has been concerning for dozens of people living there, with one student telling Leeds Student of her plight.
Joanne Slack a fresher residing at Carr Mills said maintenance issues had plagued her first year living away from home. “The hot water first went off on a weekend before the Christmas holidays,” the Cultural Studies student said. “There’s no on-site office at weekends so we rang one of the wardens. Maintenance didn’t come until another couple of days after and because they couldn’t fix it straight away we were without it for quite a few days. I didn’t know why there was a delay.”
“It went off again when we came back after Christmas,” she added. “It meant we couldn’t wash up or clean ourselves for a week as we came back before term started.”
Problems for Joanne escalated before Easter. “The lighting in the stairway was off for a week. Every night that we came in we walked up the stairs and it was pitch black.”
“People went to the site office straight away to complain but it still took quite a while for it to get fixed.”
Residents and staff have since confirmed that the lifts were out of action for a large part of the holidays while the problem was being located and mended.
While any halls housing large groups of students is likely to attract problems, the length of time taken to fix issues at Carr Mills in the current situation is unique.
The legal case will be yet another headache for the University over the Halls, which opened in September 2006. In November Leeds Student investigated a series of muggings in the area around Carr Mills, which prompted the University to launch a bus scheme to transport residents home.
The difficulties throughout the year have led to Joanne questioning her choice of Halls. “I don’t think these are the best halls,” she said. “We’re paying a lot of money for them. There are things wrong with the halls that mean we shouldn’t be paying as much as we are.”
Joanne told us she is paying £3790 for her year tenancy. The accommodation website states that prices for the next academic year range between £4100 and £4250, representing an increase of approximately eight per cent.
The University has guaranteed its Carr Mills residents that their tenancy won’t be affected by the legal conflict.
“The University of Leeds leases a number of student flats at Carr Mills from the Carr Mills Investment Partnership and we currently have more than 200 students living there,” a spokesperson said. “Whilst there has recently been a dispute between the Carr Mills Investment Partnership and the property company the Adderstone Group, which owns the freehold of the site and also provides some facility management services there, we understand that both parties are working to resolve their differences.
They added: “Residential & Commercial Services manage and maintain one large building at the Carr Mills Site and respond to all maintenance issues that are reported or found during inspection as quickly as possible.
“We want to reassure those students presently living in the building we lease, that recent
disagreements between the University’s landlord and the freeholder pose no threat to their ongoing residence at Carr Mills.”
Speaking to Leeds Student yesterday a representative of Adderstone said that discussions were ongoing and that he was “hopeful the situation would be resolved quickly”. But he added that when lawyers were involved in a dispute of this nature time was often inestimable.
Originally published in Leeds Student on May 1
Brian Cowen, the Taoiseach, is a member of an Irish consortium that owns apartments in the complex, which has become embroiled in a legal wrangle with the freeholders of the site located in Meanwood.
Among the accusations levied at the Irish owners, The Carr Mills Partnership, by Adderstone Group, the freeholders, is that they are illegally sub-letting the properties to the University. Adderstone are also threatening to take Mr Cowen and his fellow investors to court over non-payment of £100,000 in rent and management fees.
Over Easter a clutch of Irish papers reported on the developments with the Times revealing that Adderstone Group has written to Mr Cowen and his colleagues informing them: “Contrary to the terms of your leases you have sub-let without authority to the University of Leeds.”
According to the paper, Adderstone see this as “an irredeemable breach of covenant” and have told the investors legal action and repossession of property is a real possibility.
The Irish consortium bought the apartments from the developers of Carr Mills in 2005 with a view to sub-letting the apartments the University, maintaining management rights during this time. But formal written consent to go ahead with the letting was not recorded.
When the developer then sold to Adderstone in 2007 this discrepancy quickly became apparent.
Importantly, the new freeholders also took over management rights from the consortium. The Irish owners were keen to keep hold of this aspect of their investment, as it can be quite lucrative with managers charging high fees to residents for the upkeep of communal areas.
In late April, The Sunday Times reported how a student became trapped in a lift in one of the blocks while the emergency phone used to dial for help was dead. When Adderstone sent workmen out they discovered the Irish owners had changed the locks.
The inability for the freeholders to get into the property they manage proved the catalyst for the legal case launch, with the dispute becoming public in the last few weeks.
The company says that it has been trying to recover £100,000 in unpaid management fees and ground rent from the 38 investors who own the 48 apartments in the development, accumulated since it began managing the complex in late 2007.
Throughout this time the two companies have been arguing over who should maintain to buildings, leading to delays in repairs and upkeep. The disruption has been concerning for dozens of people living there, with one student telling Leeds Student of her plight.
Joanne Slack a fresher residing at Carr Mills said maintenance issues had plagued her first year living away from home. “The hot water first went off on a weekend before the Christmas holidays,” the Cultural Studies student said. “There’s no on-site office at weekends so we rang one of the wardens. Maintenance didn’t come until another couple of days after and because they couldn’t fix it straight away we were without it for quite a few days. I didn’t know why there was a delay.”
“It went off again when we came back after Christmas,” she added. “It meant we couldn’t wash up or clean ourselves for a week as we came back before term started.”
Problems for Joanne escalated before Easter. “The lighting in the stairway was off for a week. Every night that we came in we walked up the stairs and it was pitch black.”
“People went to the site office straight away to complain but it still took quite a while for it to get fixed.”
Residents and staff have since confirmed that the lifts were out of action for a large part of the holidays while the problem was being located and mended.
While any halls housing large groups of students is likely to attract problems, the length of time taken to fix issues at Carr Mills in the current situation is unique.
The legal case will be yet another headache for the University over the Halls, which opened in September 2006. In November Leeds Student investigated a series of muggings in the area around Carr Mills, which prompted the University to launch a bus scheme to transport residents home.
The difficulties throughout the year have led to Joanne questioning her choice of Halls. “I don’t think these are the best halls,” she said. “We’re paying a lot of money for them. There are things wrong with the halls that mean we shouldn’t be paying as much as we are.”
Joanne told us she is paying £3790 for her year tenancy. The accommodation website states that prices for the next academic year range between £4100 and £4250, representing an increase of approximately eight per cent.
The University has guaranteed its Carr Mills residents that their tenancy won’t be affected by the legal conflict.
“The University of Leeds leases a number of student flats at Carr Mills from the Carr Mills Investment Partnership and we currently have more than 200 students living there,” a spokesperson said. “Whilst there has recently been a dispute between the Carr Mills Investment Partnership and the property company the Adderstone Group, which owns the freehold of the site and also provides some facility management services there, we understand that both parties are working to resolve their differences.
They added: “Residential & Commercial Services manage and maintain one large building at the Carr Mills Site and respond to all maintenance issues that are reported or found during inspection as quickly as possible.
“We want to reassure those students presently living in the building we lease, that recent
disagreements between the University’s landlord and the freeholder pose no threat to their ongoing residence at Carr Mills.”
Speaking to Leeds Student yesterday a representative of Adderstone said that discussions were ongoing and that he was “hopeful the situation would be resolved quickly”. But he added that when lawyers were involved in a dispute of this nature time was often inestimable.
Originally published in Leeds Student on May 1
Friday, 1 May 2009
Hyde Park Picture House stages BBC first
The Hyde Park Picture House played host to Radio 5 Live’s Simon Mayo show, the first time it has been broadcast away from the BBC’s London headquarters.
Almost 300 people queued for nearly four hours for the chance to be in the audience for the programme’s Film Reviews segment, headlined by the popular critic Mark Kermode.
Airing every Friday, Mayo and Kermode’s dissection of the latest cinema releases has developed a cult following, regularly attracting over six million live listeners, while the podcast version is the most downloaded movie show in the country, hitting on average 134,000 subscribers each week. The pair are famous for jovial bickering and inventive games.
Kermode, who is also resident movie critic for BBC2’s The Culture Show and regular Observer contributor, was thrilled with the turnout:
“We didn’t really know how well it was going to go as we’ve never done the live thing before,” he said. “But it was incredibly successful and we were absolutely thrilled that so many people, with such a wide range, turned up.”
The pair, who had earlier been interviewed by LSRfm, were initially sceptical at how performing in front of a crowd on stage, rather than alone in a studio, would be received.
“It’s completely different when there’s just two of you sitting in a studio with a microphone in the middle talking to each other,” Kermode said. “You’ve got no real sense of how many people are listening.”
Throughout the hour-long output the audience were asked for their opinions on the highest grossing films that week. The quality of analysis offered was no surprise to Kermode.
“People were funny and witty and had intelligent things to say,” he said. “There was no delay; we trusted the audience and assumed they were up to speed.
“I’ve always been fairly knocked out by the standard of contribution from listeners’ emails. The idea of dumbing things down to be populist has absolutely no merit.”
Kermode, as famous for his opinions as his quiff, thought the listed building was an excellent choice of location for the inaugural roadshow event and advocated the wider consumption of art house cinema:
“It was a lovely place to start. The Hyde Park has a real sense of history and theatre – it’s such a fabulous building.
“I do think there’s something about in art house cinemas. People forget they used to call them picture palaces; they were a little bit like going into church.
“People didn’t go into them and treat them like they do now and just talk all the time and use their mobile phones; they treated them a little more respectfully. I think the place you watch a film actually affects your reaction to it.”
Show producers revealed to Leeds Student that the next outside broadcast would take place in Edinburgh in June, to coincide with the city’s famed film festival.
Originally published in Leeds Student on May 1 2009
Media turning a blind eye?
Wilson Palacios is a very lucky man. Or rather Cristiano Ronaldo is. Each player’s good fortune centres around a two-footed tackle the Honduran midfielder launched in the direction of the Portuguese’s knee-caps in the recent blockbuster at Old Trafford. The latter because he skilfully avoided contact; the former because he less-skilfully avoided any punishment from Howard Webb. A stern ticking-off for what can only be seen as a deliberate attempt to injure an opponent was all Webb deemed necessary.
That the man in charge thought it a minor offence is outrageous. That the player in question has avoided further condemnation in the mass media is even worse. Heaven knows headlines gave enough focus to another refereeing decision. The brilliant, title-defining comeback by United was to an extent overshadowed by a debatable penalty which provided the spring-board for the memorable turnaround. Webb was even forced to admit his 'mistake', saying it “wasn’t the best” decision of his career.
Why, if the media are intent on analysing every move a ref makes were they blind to Palacios’ potential career-ender? Just as Redknapp claimed the penalty changed the game irreconcilably, the lack of a red to Spurs’ most effective midfield player produced the same effect, earlier on in proceedings.
Ronaldo was rightly sent off for a similar tackle on Andy Cole in 2006’s derby match at Eastlands. Journalists churned out a massive amount of column inches of condemnation in the immediate aftermath. The reaction is notably muted on this occasion. We are left to wonder why that is.
In an interesting footnote, Paul Scholes wasn’t so blind. Within minutes of coming on as a sub he’d introduced himself to Wilson with the only way he knows how. Multiple times. If the man in the middle wasn’t going to enforce the rules, the Ginger Assassin was.
That the man in charge thought it a minor offence is outrageous. That the player in question has avoided further condemnation in the mass media is even worse. Heaven knows headlines gave enough focus to another refereeing decision. The brilliant, title-defining comeback by United was to an extent overshadowed by a debatable penalty which provided the spring-board for the memorable turnaround. Webb was even forced to admit his 'mistake', saying it “wasn’t the best” decision of his career.
Why, if the media are intent on analysing every move a ref makes were they blind to Palacios’ potential career-ender? Just as Redknapp claimed the penalty changed the game irreconcilably, the lack of a red to Spurs’ most effective midfield player produced the same effect, earlier on in proceedings.
Ronaldo was rightly sent off for a similar tackle on Andy Cole in 2006’s derby match at Eastlands. Journalists churned out a massive amount of column inches of condemnation in the immediate aftermath. The reaction is notably muted on this occasion. We are left to wonder why that is.
In an interesting footnote, Paul Scholes wasn’t so blind. Within minutes of coming on as a sub he’d introduced himself to Wilson with the only way he knows how. Multiple times. If the man in the middle wasn’t going to enforce the rules, the Ginger Assassin was.
Saturday, 14 March 2009
Researchers can't get 'essential' texts
Postgraduate students desperate for new books critical to furthering their research are being told by the Library “we must not order books that are not on reading lists,” Leeds Student has discovered.
Bertie Russell, a Geography PhD student, has been unable to use a book “essential” to his research because the library does not stock it and his purchase suggestion was rejected.
Bertie was dismayed at the response: “It is one of only two books that have been written on the issue – so, it is essential that I have access to it. It costs £20 but I can’t get the book, as there are no funds available.”
He explained that the only way for him to obtain the book is if a sympathetic lecturer were to place it on a reading list. “But that means research is largely being determined by the remit of what is already being taught,” he said.
“It’s quite illogical if research is supposed to be producing something new. There is not much precedent for my subject area within Leeds Uni, so the Library is particularly scarce on the newer books.”
“The recent fall in the value of sterling has hit the Library, as some of our purchases are made in dollars and euros.” Margaret Coutts, University Librarian and Keeper of the Brotherton Collection, said. “Subscriptions in US dollars are currently costing an additional 37%, and those in Euros an additional 19% above the anticipated cost.”
Thornes was on hand to explain the Library’s reasoning. “Texts on reading lists are used by large numbers of students, typically a single copy of a reading list book would be used by around 20 students,” she said. “Books requested for research, tend to be used extensively by only one individual.”
The Library’s current stance is at odds with information provided at start of the year. “I was informed before starting my PhD that the Library appreciate the suggestions of research students as it means less work for the faculty librarian.” Bertie said. “The books a PhD student recommend are also likely to be at the ‘cutting edge’ of research, helping to open access to these topics for students in all cohorts.”
An article in the Times Higher Education highlights the problem as a national one. THE reported that the fall in the value of the pound is having a ‘crippling effect’ on the budgets of UK university libraries with Glasgow University estimating that every time the pound went down either a euro cent or a US cent over a year, it would cost their library £12,000 and £7,000, respectively.
“This is indeed a national problem and all university libraries are experiencing the same,” Coutts explained.
The Library say that the block on orders will be in place until May, after book costing has been reassessed. For the time being PhD students should be offered alternatives, such as document supply or inter-library loans.
The Vice-Chancellor Michael Arthur was open in his assessment of the cash flow problem. “We’re facing quite a bit of financial turmoil,” he admitted during a recent question and answer session with students. “I’ve been putting the Library under some pressure by asking for an extra five per cent efficiency as a way of coping with the economic downturn.”
Arthur added: “We’ll try and ensure that material for students is affected least; the research side might be affected more.
“Library costs actually inflate at way above the rate of inflation – about 6 per cent per annum. When I arrived here we were actually spending about £8m in the library and we’re now spending £12m.
“The library is not suffering a cutback in funding, we’re talking about not increasing it by as much as we had planned.”
Originally published in Leeds Student on March 13
£360,000: Fine for some. University library pockets record sum in fees
Leeds University libraries took £360,000 in fines in the last academic year, figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act have revealed.
The total is up £60,000 from the £295,000 charged in 2006/07 – a rise of more than 20% in one year.
In all, the University has amassed £925,919 in library fines over the last three academic years.
The figures reveal that the average undergraduate pays around £9.30 in library fines for every year of their degree, totalling £28 for the last three.
Exeter student paper, Exepose, reported last year that the University of Manchester collected the highest amount in fines of those libraries that responded to their enquiries.
Manchester, the largest university in the country with over 39,000 students, charged £190,388 in 2006/07. The figures obtained by Leeds Student show that Leeds exceeded this total by over £100,000, even before the 20% increase that occurred last year.
The figures come as part of a response to a Freedom of Information Act request sent to the University by Leeds Student earlier this year.
Public authorities are legally required to respond to requests submitted under the act, and subject to a number of conditions they must supply the information within 20 working days.
The response from the library came after 21 days, one day over the legal maximum.
The University has moved to justify the record sum collected.
“The significant rise in fines charges between 06/07 and 07/08 was because the overall fines threshold was raised from £10 to £30,” Janet R Jurica, Senior Assistant Registrar at the University explained. “Whilst before students had to clear their fines at £10 they can now accrue higher fines before their accounts are suspended.”
Margaret Coutts, University Librarian and Keeper of the Brotherton Collection, said the decision was student-led. “The threshold was originally introduced in consultation with students to prevent their borrowing being blocked too rapidly when using our self-service lending facilities in the evening,” she said.
However, Katie McDougall, second year Theology and Religious studies student, thinks the change was for the worse. “I don’t think the threshold increase was a good thing,” said Katie. “It means people will keep books out for longer meaning others can’t because I don’t think fines deter people that much.”
To many students, however, the fines represent a hidden charge for using what are regarded as essential facilities.
Penny Walker, in her third year of studying English, said: “I’m shocked at the figures. It just seems so much money.” Penny thinks that incurring fines is ultimately inevitable. “If you’re using the library regularly it is unavoidable to rack up charges, she said. “I took out a primary text at the start of the year to use for my assessed essay and renewed it each time I was required to. But a week before deadline someone put it on hold and I was unable to renew it again.
“I desperately needed it for the essay so had to keep it and incur the charges. I was also blocked from taking out any other books.”
Misleading
Aled John, another third year English student, reckons the large total is slightly misleading. “The grand total, in its accumulated form, sounds horrific,” he said. “It seems one ostensibly reminiscent of the sort of miserly and loveless revenue generation endorsed by councils all over the UK in the form of parking tickets we all have grown to despise.”
“Roughly speaking though, the current figure for the library fines works out at an average of 11 quid per head, deflating the shock of the hike in thousands that the statistics show.”
Aled says charges are necessary: “As long as the library’s punitive policy is relatively comparable to the costs of running such an institution, and at the same time feasibly repayable, I don’t think it is that problematic.”
Coutts explained the role of the fines. “The sole purpose of Library fines is to prevent individuals from keeping books for unreasonably long periods and so disadvantage others who need to use them,” she said. “We set the rates to make them a deterrent only, and not an opportunity to make money from our customers.”
Coutts added: “The money from fines goes into the Library’s general revenue account and is used to support collections and services for students.”
Universities such as Birmingham, Manchester and University College London adopt a similar approach when it comes to library fines, charging daily rates along the lines of those set by Leeds. Each institution levies around a 40p tariff for a seven day loan.
Ryan Mole, 4th year Physics student, suggested that the reason for Leeds’ huge lead over other universities might involve more than just the scale of the charges per day.
“As a physics student, I find that all the books I need are always in seven day loan, but there are always a dozen copies of each book and there is only ever one or two out on loan,” Ryan said.
“The higher charge per day for seven day loans, as well as the higher frequency with which they must be renewed, means I find it much easier to accrue large fines. The standard loan section for my subject seems to feature books that have very little to do with the modules taught, and they definitely aren’t on reading lists.”
Course matters
Rachel Garrard, a final year Accounting and Business student, thinks students doing courses dependent on loaning literature are more at risk:
“People that do subjects where you tend to take out a lot of books are penalised more. I’ve only taken out out three books all year, whereas friends doing Arts degrees have taken out dozens.”
Penny questioned why students received fines for books not on reserve: “Having to renew books that people haven’t asked for is irritating. Getting fined for not renewing them on time when no one else wants them seems unnecessary, especially if the fining system is only in place to act as a deterrent. You are clearly not being of inconvenience to anyone else.”
Aled saw the system as fair though: “My personal tracklist of fines has held rather steadily at around £27 for the last year or so. As long as there is no favouritism, and the rise in monetary retribution for slack students (like myself) gets injected back into the system and not the pockets of the ‘suits’, then more power to it.”
No fines at all
Other UK universities have adopted what many cash-strapped students might regard as much fairer approach to late returns. The University of Southampton doesn’t charge their users fines at all, instead suspending users’ borrowing privileges until late books are returned, and simply charging for the replacement cost of a new book if it is not returned within 56 days.
Coutts said that this year more students were returning books on time. “The drop in fines for this academic year is currently approximately 10%. Of course, we won’t know the final figure until the end of the year.”
She added: “The Library does carry out regular checks on the level of the fines charged, and this happened most recently in 2007.
“Currently, we are planning to introduce online fines payment next year. We believe that this will make it easier for students to settle their fines promptly, and not run up large sums which cause problems for paying back.”
Originally published in Leeds Student on March 13
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)