Monday, May 5, 2025
Blog Page 1227

Picks of the Week HT15 Week 3

0

Blackwell’s Presents: Samantha Shannon, Saturday, 3-4pm, Sheldonian Theatre

To celebrate the publication of The Mime Order, Shannon will be discussing her work with Andy Serkis, of The Lord of the Rings fame, and Jonathan Cavendish, co-founder of Imaginarium Studios, which has purchased the film rights to her first novel, The Bones Season.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10919%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Russell Kane & Friends, Saturday, 7.30pm, Glee Club

No-one has ever been to Glee. We know that. But maybe its time to rectify that, with Russell Kane – star of Live at the Apollo, The Royal Variety Show, and Live at the Electric – hosting a night of his favourite comedians, and presenting some of his own comedy too. Yeah, we know he’s not funny, but maybe your mates think he is.

Erik Feig, Tuesday, 8pm, The Oxford Union

President of Lionsgate Motion Picture Group, Feig will be talking about his career in the film industry. With film credits that range from The Hunger Games, to Twilight, to The Hurt Locker, Feig’s talk will provide an insight into the life of one of Hollywood’s leading producers.

Valley Uprising, Tuesday, 9pm, Ultimate Picture Palace

As part of the tenth annual Adventure Film Festival, the Ultimate Picture Palace will be giving a one-off screening of Valley Uprising, a feature-length film chronicling the history of rock climbing in California’s Yosemite Valley. Thrilling, evocative and beautiful, don’t miss the opportunity to see this on the big screen.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10920%%[/mm-hide-text] 

West Side Story, Wednesday-Saturday, 7.30pm, Oxford Playhouse

Rival gangs, the New York Jets and the Puerto Rico Sharks, come face to face in the oppressive heat of 1950s Manhattan. One of two student productions to grace the Playhouse’s main stage this term, West Side Story promises not to disappoint, featuring some unforgettable songs: ‘America’, ‘Tonight’, ‘Somewhere’, and more.

Slow Club, Thursday, 7.30pm, The Bullingdon Arms (aka The Art Bar)

Sheffield duo Slow Club released their debut album in 2009, which was initially categorised as ‘anti-folk’, whatever that means. They arrive at The Bullingdon on Thursday so if you want a taste of their exuberant sounds, rockabilly beats and harmonious hooks, get yo’self down there.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10921%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Charlie Simpson, Friday, 6pm, O2 Academy

Legendary, that’s right legendary, Busted frontman Charlie Simpson arrives at Oxford’s O2 without a band for the very first time. What better way to end a tiring week than rocking out to such classic anthems as ‘Year 3000’, ‘Air Hostess’, and ‘Crashed The Wedding’. It’s 2003 all over again. Note: Cherwell cannot confirm he will play any of the aforementioned bangers.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10922%%[/mm-hide-text] 

Milestones: Restoration Comedy

0

Perhaps unsurprisingly, given the recent memories of Oliver Cromwell’s oppressively puritanical turn as Lord Protector, when monarchy returned in the form of Charles II, Britain was in need of a good laugh. The theatres had been closed for the past 18 years, but they were swiftly reopened, and the theatrical fare on offer – and in particular what we now know as the “Restoration Comedy” – was more riotous and raunchy than ever before.

Restoration comedies often feature rakish heroes seduced into matrimony by witty women, but the occasional similarities between works haven’t stopped them from becoming firm favourites of the theatre-going public and actors alike – last year in Oxford we had a well-received production of Etherege’s The Man of Mode, and Farquhar’s The Recruiting Officer, while Our Country’s Good was also a recent choice by our university’s dramatists.

Performed in their original context, these comedies had an added appeal – for the first time, women had been permitted to act on the British stage. The first female actors proved themselves more than capable of achieving levels of fame comparable to their male counterparts, perhaps the most notorious of all being Nell Gwyn, who, following on from her time on the stage, ultimately became the mistress of the king himself.

The trend of having female characters disguise themselves as men really took off post-1660, a fashion cited by some critics as showing additional agency was being afforded to female characters in their taking on of the traditionally male roles in society. However, there’s arguably a more cynical motive at play in this plot device – male dress involved stockings and breeches, allowing the men in the audience to get a close look at the contours of the women’s legs that just wouldn’t have been possible in the more cumbersome female fashions of the time.

Though these arguably more exploitative elements of the Restoration stage might be seen as eclipsing any chance of female success, women in behind-the-scenes roles were having unprecedented triumphs. The era found in Aphra Behn the first female commercial playwright, who was for a time the most performed playwright on the English stage of any gender, her hilarious characters winning over the theatre-going public whilst she somehow found the time to produce novels, translations and work as a spy for the Britain, as well as having affairs with male and female lovers.

Behn’s work, along with that of many authors of Restoration comedies, was neglected in later centuries due to its bawdiness, but has been regaining popularity in recent years. Contemporary readers and audiences might be surprised at how ‘modern’ some of the attitudes expressed in these plays seem. The past might not be such a foreign country after all, and Restoration comedy shows we still share moral preoccupations and sources of comedy with the cultural world of the late Seventeenth Century.

We find in these comedies attitudes that can be both appealing and repellent, but that are always current.

From funny to f*cked: is the British sitcom dead?

0

When the humble British sitcom is done well, it is one of the most enjoyable forms of comedy. If there is one partnership that perfectly exemplifies how well Britain can do a situation comedy, that partnership is Ricky Gervais and Stephen Merchant, particularly with their first show The Office – one of the world’s great creations that I’m sure will come to be remembered in the same manner as the Mona Lisa, Hamlet and The Beheading of Saint John the Baptist.

Its dry British humour, including moments so uncomfortable that you’d rather murder a kitten than look at the screen, combined with addictively funny and loveable characters and a sincerely charming and sometimes emotional plotline, makes it the perfectly moreish TV programme.

Their next project, Extras, depicted the jealous and shallow Andy Millman (Gervais) desperately trying to break out of being a ‘background artist’, and became equally famous. Whilst perhaps not of quite the same standard as The Office (can anything ever be?) Extras was still a strong comedy, and was well received by critics and audiences alike.

To replace that ‘special quality’ from The Office that it inevitably wouldn’t have, Extras added embarrassment and humiliation to its plotlines and introduced Stephen Merchant to the acting scene, playing the incompetent agent Darren Lamb, one of British comedy’s all-time greatest characters.

From here, Gervais and Merchant’s aims for their comedy changed massively, and their work suffered greatly as a result. From Gervais’ string of mildly amusing comedies such as The Invention of Lying to Merchant’s ‘quite funny’ HBO series Hello Ladies, and its awful straight to TV follow-up movie of the same name, the duo have lost that spark that once made their comedy great in attempting to target the US market. The excruciating moments have been replaced with slapstick whilst their emotional scenes are graceless and awkward to watch.

I forgive them for this decline, which was a consequence of broadening their comedy for a larger pay cheque, and I still revere them as the creators of something amazing, but when news of a future project from Gervais and/or Merchant reaches me, such as the up and coming Life on the Road David Brent movie, I find myself not excited, but rather filled with fear that my once loved characters are being ruined.

Although there have been some relatively recent moments of British comedic brilliance, Peep Show, (and the delectable chemistry between David Mitchell and Robert Webb) and Phoneshop to name but two, these are sadly being almost totally overrun by the now notorious British shitcoms, *ahem*, sitcoms, flooding the British market. In shows such as Miranda, Man Down and Friday Night Dinner, slapstick rules supreme and one joke is milked until three series in – when the show ends because the writers have given up and are shivering on the floor in a vast pool of egomania.

The British sitcom is now smothered by attempts to broaden appeal, and a focus on generating money. We might fear that this once great comedic form is on the verge of extinction in its true, genuinely amusing form. But can it be saved?

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10916%%[/mm-hide-text] 

The answer to that comes from a new British comedy duo on the scene, and the answer is definitively ‘yes’. This new pair is Allan Mustafa and Hugo Chegwin, the two leading characters in BBC3’s People Just Do Nothing. Written and produced by the duo, along with Steve, a.k.a The Wiggy Mess, and their designated ‘fixer’ Chabuddy G., People Just Do Nothing follows the lives of MC Grindah and DJ Beats, owners of Kurupt FM, a pirate garage radio station in a secret location in West London.

This sitcom, aired in 2014, breathes life back into the British TV comedy scene and is perhaps the most praiseworthy British sitcom since The Office. It certainly has strong parallels with the show, and, on more than a few occasions, Grindah certainly appears to be the David Brent of the underground garage scene.

Despite this slight similarity, the show is refreshingly original and once again achieves that perfect balance between addictive characters, intelligently funny dialogue, and painfully uncomfortable scenes. People Just Do Nothing goes to show that by sticking entirely to British humour at its best, and staying with an idea, rather than expanding it extensively, we can create something truly hilarious and potentially seminal. With the next season coming this year, surely People Just Do Nothing and the DJs of Kurupt FM are the future of British comedy?

Freakshow Television

0

Currently airing is the new series of Bodyshockers: Nips, Tucks and Tattoos.This is a Channel 4 documentary (in the sense of the word that is only ever applicable on Channel 4) fronted by Katie Piper, herself the victim of an acid attack, in which she meets people who have chosen to take their body to extremes, be it through cosmetic surgery, piercings, tattoos, or other painful body modifications, and, most importantly, regret doing so.

The programme shows us the ins and outs of extreme aesthetics, in the most literal sense of the word. It regularly features graphic surgical scenes, and each episode is punctuated by pained groans and people adding to, or removing, their collection of extreme modifications. Bodyshockers is not the only television programme of this ilk. From Embarrassing Bodies (another Channel 4 creation) to TLC’s charmingly named Too Ugly for Love?, British television is full of lifestyle programmes that revolve around unconventional bodies, whether through biological disorders, botched procedures, or simply visible, glaring and brutally regretful decisions.

Bodyshockers paints itself as a semi-charitable enterprise, charting the reversal of the modifications made by its subjects (cue more graphic surgical scenes), as well as pitting them against someone intending to have a similar procedure done, in order to prevent them from making what was for them, a mistake. Often emotional, and always shocking, it would be unfair not to say that I openly admit to enjoying Bodyshockers, and similar modification-orientated programmes.

Where this ever expanding TV genre becomes alarming, however, is in programmes like Too Ugly for Love? or The Undatables, where people’s mental and physical health is paraded across British television under a façade of showing us that they’re ‘just like us’, when really we know that they have been put on primetime TV to tell us precisely the opposite. The Little Couple, Bodyshockers’ ‘parent’ programme Bodyshock and other similar aspects of the ‘documentary and lifestyle’ genre all set out to display the ‘freaks’ of the world: people with conditions that range from minor to completely debilitating. When you realise that Bodyshockers is alarmingly similar to programmes like this, the overall picture becomes much darker. Just because this was something they did to themselves doesn’t really make it any better, or more acceptable; it’s just how we legitimise another covert means of public mockery.

Surely the popularity of ‘freakshow’ TV actually reveals something fairly alarming about the mentality of the typical TV watcher, myself included. We will sit, by choice, taking an hour out of our evening, to watch people who have made irreparable and extreme changes to their bodies, or were simply born slightly different to ourselves, try and go about their daily lives. In reality, I think it boils down to the fact that we like to watch others suffer. We like to see people struggle, to feel intellectually superior to their poor decisions, or to simply feel fortunate that we are ‘normal’. TV like this is designed to make what is ‘average’ or ‘normal’ feel ‘superior’, and when you take a step back and look at it like that, an evening watching Bodyshockers just doesn’t sound so sweet.

Review: American Sniper

0

★★☆☆☆

Two Stars

Americans with nationalist tendencies: look away now. Clint Eastwood’s latest
film, based on the autobiography of Chis Kyle, tells the eulogistic story of a young everyman soldier who, while looking to find himself by shooting the USA’s enemies, grows into the deadliest sniper of the Iraq War.

American Sniper begins with Kyle’s early life, in which he kills animals, beats up bullies (literally liquidising another child’s nose aged about ten) and is taught mantras by his father like, “Never leave your rifle in the dirt.” Church, rodeos and violence shape him as he grows up. When Kyle sees footage of the 1998 Dar-Es-Salaam bombings, he is shocked. His response? To enlist and go kill people; a subtle, tried-and-tested way to deal with terrorism. The rest of the film sees him unfailingly bedecked in wraparound sunglasses, shooting Iraqis. There’s the typical witty banter during the basic training and battle sequences that we’ve come to expect from the modern war film – if this appeals to you, then you should watch Jarhead or Full Metal Jacket instead.

It’s awkward, but one almost knows what to expect from this movie before it begins. The film opens with the Islamic call to prayer and something that sounds like a pulsing heartbeat; immediately something is ominous, but why should it be? Evil Muslims? Surely not! Right on cue, a woman in a hijab turns up and gives a child a bomb. As well as simplistic racial stereotypes and mild Islamophobia, there’s a lot of violence against children in this film; whenever Eastwood wants to make a point, he introduces a young boy who usually gets
smashed up or killed. The exploitation leaves a bitter aftertaste. Ironically, the Arab characters are so panto-evil (drilling children in the kneecaps) that you don’t believe in them, whereas Kyle himself has such an understated stupidity that you really don’t like him.

Early in the film, he asks “Why would you say I’m self-centred? I’d lay down my life for my country. It’s the greatest country on earth.” Thus he inadvertently answers his own question. Sure, we’re meant to feel for the man. He has a girlfriend – later a wife – for whom he wins teddies at fairground shooting games, and children whom we see grow up between his tours of duty. The problem is, he’s so arrogant it’s impossible to want to have anything to do with him other than a quick sit down to explain the failures of Western foreign policy since 2001, and why he represents them inherently. Kyle wears a military medal over his heart on his wedding day. He carries a Bible with him when he enters the field. If his personal relationships are meant
to be emphasised, they are lost beneath a tide of jingoism. He feels vaguely bad when he shoots a child, but he gets over it and is ready to kill another later. Bradley Cooper is usually a decent actor but even he can’t humanise the man who in real life wrote how fun it was to kill “savages” and how he “couldn’t give a flying fuck about the Iraqis”. Are we meant to hate him or not?

It’s not all bad. A duel with an enemy sniper develops over the course of the film that is reminiscent of the best points of Enemy at the Gates, with some great, tense results. The action sequences in general are well-executed. American Sniper is not a badly-made film, it’s just one with a ridiculously simple and frankly incorrect message.

Ultimately, it’s for people like Eastwood, who don’t really see war itself as evil but rather a conflict between good guys and bad guys. This is a Republican’s Hurt Locker. In a good war film you want to see the ills of conflict and the shades of grey but American Sniper has about as much subtlety as Call of Duty. Last week, Michael Moore tweeted “Snipers aren’t heroes. And invaders [are] worse”. Naturally, he’s being slated by every rightwinger from Fox News to Sarah Palin to Kid Rock, but I’m inclined to agree.

Death of ‘Sad Dad’

0

We’re all acquainted with spring/summer 2014’s ‘Europeancamper-sandals’ look, granted some of us (me) more than others. But fear not all you financially fretful fashionistas. For while Birkenstocks (the orthopaedic sandal developed in the 50s) were last summer’s must-have shoe, the good news is that you don’t have to pack those sandals away just yet. This winter calls for the doublestrapped Birkenstock Arizonas to be worn with socks.

Katherine Ormerod, Senior Fashion News Editor at Grazia says, “The Birkenstock look is a more affordable take on looks from Prada and Marni.” The socks are crucial. According to Ormerod, “The sock needs to be substantial. Something with a bit of a hiking vibe to it. Best get them in a grungy colour, a grey or an olive or a brown, and wear them a bit slouched down. The whole look needs to be outdoorsy. It can work for men as well as women too, as part of that whole urban woodsman look. You know: the beard, lumberjack shirt, rolled-up jeans, sandals and socks …”

There is absolutely no doubt that this trend will be both comfortable and warm (particularly as Birkenstock have released a new sheepskin-lined Arizona sandal!), but conventionally sexy it is not. So why the sudden penchant for socks and sandals? High street retailer Debenhams has recorded a 68 per cent rise in sales of socks and sandals while the purchases of bright short-sleeved shirts have rocketed by 72 per cent, completing the ‘sad-dad’ ensemble.

According to personal stylist Alain Mehada of Debenhams, this bizarre trend might simply be explained by comfort. “We didn’t see it coming, but perhaps we should have done as let’s be honest there are fewer things more comfy than a solid well-made sandal and a soft pair of socks to stop them rubbing on bare skin.” And regarding the shirts, who can resist a smile when someone saunters past in a garishly bright short-sleeved top? It brightens up the day and brings memories of holidays and beach-side fun, even if you are stuck at home this winter

Fashion Matters

0

This week, Paris Men’s Fashion Week drew to a close, but people are still talking about it, and about one show in particular: Rick Owens. Perhaps, though, you would know the brand better as Dick Owens, as it was affectionately nicknamed and then relentlessly shared after the show – ending up going viral online.

For anyone who has somehow missed this milestone in men’s fashion, models took to the catwalk in oversized, ‘peep-hole’ garments that revealed, in some cases, the models’ penises.

The attention attracted by Owens’ stunt is unusual for men’s fashion, which is, in general, less talked about and less wellknown than women’s. Romain Reglade, St Hilda’s second year and veteran fashion week photographer, who shot ‘London Collections: Men this year for Vogue UK’, explained to Cherwell, “It’s very different being at men’s fashion weeks. Quite simply, everything is on a smaller scale: there is less media, fewer bloggers and in general less buzz.” Reglade puts this partially down to the fact that the Haute Couture shows in Paris follow straight after the men’s shows in the fashion calendar. “The designers that have both men’s and Haute Couture shows are putting most of their time and effort into the latter. Those shows are crazy. I’ve seen stars like Rihanna performing at some insane locations, like huge swimming pools with entrances on jet skis… and that’s without mentioning the clothes!”

That isn’t to say that you don’t see some weird things at the men’s shows though. Reglade warned us last week that the outfits sent down the runway at some menswear shows can often look, “like Oxford bop costumes,” with crazy make-up and weird accessories. While there is no direct precedent to the Rick Owens’ phallic flesh flashing collection, it is perhaps a natural progression: I’ve never seen a guy turn up to a bop in such a get-up, but I’ve certainly seen a few fall out of the bop and their bop costume like that. Not pretty.

Owens would clearly disagree with me. Responding to the show, and its shock factor induced hype, he said, “I pass classical marble statues of nude and draped figures in the park every day, and they are a vision of sensuality – yes, but also of grace and freedom. As a participant in one of our most progressive aesthetic arenas, am I not allowed to use this imagery? We all know that runway looks aren’t meant to be taken literally, they illustrate an ethos. I would like to present a utopian world of grace free of fear and shame.”

It seems like penises are the last flesh frontier of fear and shame in fashion. Neiman Marcus’ Fashion Director Ken Downing admitted after the show, “I’m much like a doctor. When you work in fashion, you see everything. It was just unexpected.” In fashion we should perhaps learn to expect the unexpected, but it doesn’t mean that we have to embrace it. Apparently Uggs are back ‘in’, but that doesn’t mean you’re going to see me in a pair.

Equal Opportunity: Revolution or Trend?

0

Boyfriends everywhere have long been perplexed by their girlfriends who insist on cavorting in their oversized shirts, which are then never seen again. Fashion has never been afraid to experiment with gender, and borrowing from the boys in a bid for androgyny is nothing revolutionary. But this season, clothing takes a ground-breaking stance to gender, with the introduction of the gender-neutral wardrobe.

With models lining up in all-black outfits and silver masks, the setting of Rad Hourani’s show fits seamlessly into the couture schedule. However, the masks are not just a unique aesthetic experiment; they are intended to remove any gender differences between the models. Several other designers are joining the movement, with Miuccia Prada declaring backstage, “I think to people, not to gender.”

Similar to Hourani, she snubbed the traditional approach to showing menswear and womenswear on separate catwalks, and fused the two on one runway saying, “I think the combination is more real.” JW Anderson, Vivienne Westwood, and Givenchy have all jumped on the bandwagon, leading Laura Weir, writer for Vogue, to say, “Fashion is moving beyond the straightforward notion of borrowing from the boys towards a freewheeling, fabulously grey area where clothes are gender-neutral.”

So is that it? Are men and women now living parallel lives requiring clothes that reflect this equality? It is no secret that trends dominating Fashion Week in the past have not always translated to real wardrobes. Remember the explosion of yellow-diamond grills a fews years back? Yeah, just like braces, except less effective and entirely impractical for errands down Cornmarket. Who’s to say that the unisex wardrobe will ever become a reality? Well, Selfridges say. The department store is putting into action the dissemination of this idea in the form of a pop-up retail project and three floors of unisex fashion. To reflect the genderless nature of the clothing, traditional mannequins have also been scrapped. Judd Crane stated, “We want to take our customers on a journey where they can shop and dress without limitations or stereotypes, enabling fashion to exist as a purer expression of self.”

Here, unisex brands such as Hood by Air, KTZ and 69 (thinly veiled pun there) will be stocked.

But is this a revolution or just a passing trend elevated to a phenomenon in response to the recent media spotlight on the discussion of gender? Jonathan Anderson takes a particularly cynical view. “For me, putting men and women on the same catwalk at the same time is probably a reaction to the idea of condensed seasons. It is easier to show menswer at the same time because the production schedule for both collections are similar.” So the unisex wardrobe is a not a movement towards equality but rather towards practicality – fab! A more likely explanation is that it’s more about garments for garments’ sake. T-shirts, jeans, duffel coats, biker jackets – it all means the same thing, no matter if it’s a man or woman wearing it. They are a neutral zone.

The trend appears to be just that, a trend, and not grounded in gender neutrality at all. It is the logical furtherance of the ‘boyfriendfit’, the antithesis to the ‘shapely silhouette’. Loose pieces cut away from the body that happen not to betray shape and resultantly are appropriate for unisex production. ‘Gender neutrality’ is the product of the trend rather than its motivating force. As far as pragmatic application goes, however flexible our perceptions of gender and fashion become, our bodies will always be different and there will always be both customers who enjoy androgyny and those who love to exude, respectively, masculin- and femininity

"Be prepared to argue"

0

Part of C+’s investigation into private student housing

One student told Cherwell how Premier had tried to charge them £400 for cleaning after they left their property. The tenants successfully reduced the bill to £35 after disputing the charge.

As their lease was coming to an end, a Premier employee visited to check the house and confirmed that they were “looking after the property well”, mentioning that they should clean the property thoroughly in order to avoid paying any cleaning fees. The students subsequently spent an afternoon cleaning it, but a few weeks later their checkout report had charged them £396.40 for cleaning fees.

As the tenants investigated the charge, they realised that on the closing report for the inventory, it was stated that the property should be cleaned to “a fair standard” – yet on the checkout report, the students had been charged for cleaning “to a professional stan- dard”. Guidelines on mydeposits.co.uk also supported the contention that the letting agent shouldn’t try to better the property, but should charge the tenant only what they are responsible for.

Furthermore, Premier was also the letting agent for the tenants’ neighbours, who received an almost identical checkout report, highlighting similar issues such as limescale and minor stains. However, the neighbours were charged £35 – Premier themselves were not responsible for the checkout form because the letting was carried out on a dif- ferent legal basis. Premier had tried to make the tenants pay over ten times the amount the landlord had charged their neighbours for exactly the same cleaning work.

A ‘fair wear and tear’ clause was also contained within the tenancy agreement, which, according to an interpretation by the House of Lords, allows “reasonable use of the premises by the Tenant and the ordinary operation of natural forces”. The tenants felt that the few remaining problems with the property, according to the checkout report, all “fell under wear and tear”.

Recalling how they were made to wait weeks for replies, the student commented, “perhaps they were just hoping that we would give up. It seemed that because we were an easy target, they’d deliberately tried to throw the book at us without actually reading the book first”. It took several months, but the £400 was eventually reduced to £35.

Premier responded to these claims, explaining that the person responsible for the £400 charge had been fired, and admitting that it had been “excessive” to charge the house’s residents that amount for cleaning. 

The student’s advice: 

  • Make sure you take many pictures at the start of your tenancy.
  • Consult the documents on mydeposits.co.uk and the tenancy agreement –make sure you know what you’re responsible for.
  • Make sure fair wear and tear appropriate for a student tenancy has been considered in any charges
  • Remember that the deposit is not the property of the landlord but remains the property of the tenant. Until a settlement has been agreed, any charges that are levied are only proposed charges.
  • Most importantly, be prepared to argue. Very often, students are in the right, but don’t bother to stand their ground. Estate agents count on this, so don’t give them that advantage. Fight your corner.

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10901%%[/mm-hide-text] 

The Investigation 

Fire alarm silenced and a collapsed ceiling

0

Part of C+’s investigation into private student housing

Two weeks before we were due to move into the property, we were told that our original move in date was now no longer possible, as they still had work on the property to do. When we arrived, remnants of building work were still in the kitchen and a broken radiator had not been removed.

Even after paying the first month of rent, for the second month our original negotiator from the letting agency tried to claim that our rent was in fact £300 higher than was set out in our amended tenancy agreement and took several days to admit he was being fraudulent and incorrect.

One week into the tenancy, the fire alarm system developed a fault and for a day the alarm went off continuously. An electrician was called but only managed to silence the system and remove one of the fire alarms in the hallway. At our HMO inspection last week, we discovered that the system had in fact been permanently silenced and in the event of a fire, the alarm would not have gone off.

One month into the tenancy, a damp patch which had been spreading on the ceiling of Tenant 1’s room began to bulge and eventually burst over the tenant’s bed, creating a large hole in the ceiling. For ages the bath above this room had been leaking into the ceiling. The room suffered from unhealthy levels of damp and broken plaster and, as such, Tenant 1 was displaced onto a mattress in the living room, creating a fire hazard for Tenant 2 as this obstructed access to a second bedroom. This hole took 3 weeks for the landlord to fix.

Tenant 1 moved back into his room after the hole had been covered, but the bath above was still being resealed. We were told that after 48 hours we would be able to use the shower, which we did, only to find that in fixing the leak, the plumber had forgotten to reconnect the pipes. Water flowed into the ceiling of Tenant 1’s room and through the holes which hadn’t yet been plastered – we had cascades of water flowing from the ceiling, soaking Tenant 1’s bed and wardrobe, forcing him back into the living room.

I was on the phone to S&C pretty much every day, attempting to get some action on the problems. I’ve never had any dealings with the landlord except once when he came to view the issues. However, we had dealings with two plumbers, one usually sent from the landlord and the other sent from the let- ting agents. The second plumber only came because the first plumber is, according to the agent, “notoriously unreliable and quite often doesn’t turn up” – but the landlord apparently used him because he was cheaper.

We are currently in disagreement with them over compensation. Because we’re students I think they’re aware we don’t really have any legal knowhow to take action against them. Everything is completed to the bare, bare minimum. 

[mm-hide-text]%%IMG_ORIGINAL%%10901%%[/mm-hide-text] 

S&C did not reply to our request for comment.

The Investigation