Purpose-Built Student Accommodation (PBSA) - notice period survey: responses summary

5. Conclusion

This section will briefly summarise the key points of this publication.

Circumstances and Impact of Notice Periods

Recommendation 2 of the PBSA Review Group (published in Parliamentary Question S6W-25244) referred to:

• identifying what circumstances should apply in possible cases of shorter notice periods, and
• the potential impact on investment and rent levels that shorter notice periods might potentially have.

The findings of the student and provider surveys have highlighted these issues to some extent.

Student Survey

• Approximately 50% of student survey respondents stated that they did not want to leave their accommodation during the rental period.
• Many student respondents were in PBSA for the first time (approximately 31% - 51 out of 166 responses) which may potentially have been an influencing factor.
• While students were generally in favour of shorter notice periods for PBSA, the survey responses did not point to a clear and unambiguous need for this.
• Several student respondents raised ethical objections to current arrangements to argue in favour of changes to notice periods. There was no clear consensus on what these changes should be.
• While there was clear strength of feeling from many respondents who experienced poor quality accommodation, the student survey did not find any clear consensus on this issue. There were also several positive reviews of accommodation quality, though these typically did not link explicitly to notice periods.
• A small group of respondents described how some groups of students might be particularly vulnerable or disadvantaged by the current arrangements e.g. international students, care experienced and estranged students (CEES), disabled students, or students with unplanned medical care.

Provider Survey

• The consensus among provider survey respondents was that the proposed changes to notice periods may risk negative effects, for both providers and students.
• There was clear agreement amongst almost all providers that the disadvantages of any change to notice periods would significantly outweigh any possible advantages that there may be.
• Many provider respondents identified potential impact on investment and rent levels that shorter notice periods might potentially have. For example:
  • Possible decreased investment in the PBSA market.
  • Decrease in quality standards and maintenance of accommodation.
  • Increased rent and costs for students.

Limitations

The findings of the student and provider surveys have several limitations, and will be subject to considerable uncertainty. These limitations include, but are not limited to:

• Small samples, meaning the findings cannot be assumed to be representative or generalisable.
• High variability in response rates across questions and some missing data.

Summary

• Students and providers had differing views regarding notice periods.
• Many student respondents were in favour of change to notice periods, with no consensus on what this change should be.
• Student respondents identified circumstances that might apply in possible cases of shorter notice periods. For example, in cases of:
  • Ethical objections.
  • Poor quality accommodation.
  • Potentially vulnerable or disadvantaged groups.
• The vast majority of providers were opposed to any change to notice periods, due to risks that could impact directly on providers (e.g. increased costs), and indirectly on students (e.g. increased rent).
• Provider respondents identified potential impact on investment and rent levels that shorter notice periods might potentially have. For example:
  • Possible decreased investment in the PBSA market.
  • Decrease in quality standards and maintenance of accommodation.
  • Increased rent and costs for students.
• The findings of these 2 surveys, taken on their own, can neither establish nor rule out a clear and unambiguous need for a change to notice periods.
• These findings are subject to considerable uncertainty, and cannot be taken as definitive due to a wide range of important limitations.
• The findings are approximately consistent with previous research (e.g. Gibb et al 2022; Scottish Government 2022a; Scottish Government 2022b).