‘I find it morally incomprehensible’: Students describe their despair after campus accommodation crisis forces them to defer places, couch-surf, sleep in the library or even register with homeless charities. So are greedy universities to blame?
Students across the UK have been left without affordable university accommodation after institutions admitted more students than they could house. Some are commuting long distances, couch-surfing, staying in hotels or considering sleeping in cars, while others have deferred their places, raising concerns about universities’ responsibilities and the impact on disadvantaged students.
At Exeter, Elena Acatalinei deferred studying neuroscience for a year after failing to find suitable accommodation, while some students face a 90-mile round trip from Plymouth. Southampton students have been directed to rooms in Winchester, 13 miles away, and Cardiff students were reportedly offered £750 to defer courses until 2027; at York, only 15 per cent of available freshers’ rooms cost under £200 a week, compared with 47 per cent the previous year.
- Universities have offered places without enough affordable accommodation.
- Students face deferrals, long commutes and homelessness risks.
- Rising rents and limited rooms have intensified the crisis.
New here? Start with this
University accommodation is housing arranged or approved by a university, often used by first-year students who are moving away from home. In many parts of the UK, rents have risen and private rooms are in short supply, while universities have continued to recruit large numbers of students.
The central issue is whether universities should admit only as many students as they can reasonably house, or whether finding somewhere to live is mainly the student’s responsibility. The debate also involves landlords, local housing markets and government rules on university places and funding.
The shortage matters because accommodation is essential to attending a course, not an optional extra. Students from poorer backgrounds or those unable to travel long distances may be most affected, potentially delaying or abandoning their studies and widening existing inequalities.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Universities may bear substantial responsibility when they admit more students than they can reasonably accommodate, particularly if they expand enrolment while relying on inflated housing assumptions or prioritising fee income. Students reasonably expect institutions to assess capacity and provide transparent, affordable arrangements, and disadvantaged applicants are likely to suffer most when that duty is neglected. Deferring students or sending them far from campus can therefore be seen as evidence of institutional choices that put revenue and growth ahead of welfare.
The case against
The accommodation crisis reflects wider shortages of affordable housing, rising construction and borrowing costs, planning constraints, and limited public investment, rather than simple university greed. Institutions may have obligations to support students but cannot single-handedly control local rents, building delays or demand, and restricting admissions could deny places to capable applicants. Universities might reasonably argue that expanding access while offering emergency support and alternative arrangements is preferable to reducing opportunities, even if the resulting conditions are deeply unsatisfactory.