Who runs the Codes
The National Codes are governed and overseen by the following bodies:
Consortium - has ownership of the National Codes
Committee of Management - oversees strategy
Student Advisory Group - students advising on the Codes
Audit Panel - oversees membership and verification
Tribunal - Determines the outcome of complaints
Consortium
Aims and Objectives
The Consortium has joint ownership of:
the ANUK/Unipol Code of Standards for Larger Developments for student accommodation not managed and controlled by educational establishments and
the ANUK/Unipol Code of Standards for Larger Residential Developments for student accommodation managed and controlled by educational establishments
holding both the copyright and intellectual property rights of both Codes.
The Consortium is the contracting body for the administrative arrangements with Unipol.
The Consortium is responsible for the Terms of Reference and conduct of:
the Committee of Management (CoM)
the National Codes Audit Panel
the Complaints and Tribunal System.
The Consortium shall:
appoint a Tribunal Chair (at a remuneration to be agreed) who shall be independent of the Consortium, the CoM, the Audit Panel and the governance systems of the Consortium
appoint two Tribunal Vice-Chairs (one with experience of operating PBSA and one a current student or sabbatical officer)
appoint a Chair of the Audit Panel
The Tribunal and Audit Panel Chairs, plus the Vice Chair representing providers will be appointed for a period of three years, whilst the NUS Vice Chair will serve for the period of their time in the office at NUS. The Consortium can remove any Tribunal member, by agreement, at any time.
Membership
The Consortium consists of two representatives from each of the following organisations:
Accreditation Network UK (ANUK) - Linda Cobb and Vacancy
National Union of Students (NUS) - Amira Campbell and Hannah Sketchley
Unipol - Sam Bailey-Watts and Sue Green
The Consortium will meet, as required at the request of any Member. The quorum for meetings will be three.
Committee of Management
Standing Orders
The Chair
The Chair is appointed for a period of three years by the CoM. The post is remunerated at a rate agreed by the Committee within the budgetary process. The rate of remuneration is confidential. The Chair cannot be a representative of an accommodation supplier and, ideally, should be independent of all suppliers, although knowledge of the student housing market, its standards and practices is vital.
Every meeting must have a Chair. The Chair's duties are to ensure that the meeting is conducted in such a way that the business for which it was convened is properly attended to. This includes preserving order and ensuring that the meeting does not get bogged down and thereby does not have time to conclude its business. On the other hand the Chair must ensure that all those entitled to do so may express their views and that the decisions taken by the meeting adequately reflect the views of the meeting as a whole.
The Chair decides upon the agenda and may sign off the minutes on his or her own authority.
The Chair's authority and responsibility in connection with meetings mean that his or her position is one of great influence. The Chair also has considerable authority outside meetings because they are seen as the spokesperson for the Committee and are seen as representing the Committee to outside bodies.
The Chair is the first point of reference for any investigation of complaints made against Unipol or any provider whose representative is nominated and sits as a member of the Tribunal as a Vice-Chair.
The Chair may be given additional authority by the Committee in certain areas either by a specific decision of the Committee or by accepted custom and practice.
In the event that the Chair is indisposed or cannot attend a meeting then the Deputy Chair will be required to step in.
Attendance of existing members
This Standing Order was agreed by the Committee of Management on 2 March 2007. Members missing three consecutive meetings should be asked to attend the next meeting and, if they fail to do this, they are deemed to have resigned. After this resignation they cannot serve or be nominated on to the CoM for three years from the date of that meeting. If the member concerned is nominated as a representative of a provider, that organisation shall be invited to nominate a new member.
The NCA is charged with writing to the member concerned, drawing their attention to their absences and stating that unless they attend the next meeting they will be deemed to have resigned.
Substitutes at meetings
This Standing Order was agreed by the CoM on 2 March 2007. In the case of members nominated by providers any substitutes shall be given a full role on the CoM so long as they are named by the nominating body as carrying such status and that the National Codes Administrator is informed of this in writing (including by email) not less than 48 hours before the meeting. Failing this, any substitute shall have visitor status and have speaking rights only at the gift of the Chair.
In the case of individual members (defined as not nominated by an accommodation provider), no substitutes are acceptable but visitor status can be requested from the NCA so long as this request is made not less than 48 hours before the meeting. The Chair will decide whether to grant visitor status.
Current Membership
The current membership profile is as follows:
One representative nominated by each of the following organisations:
Association of Colleges (AOC)
The UK Student Services Organisation (AMOSSHE)
Association of Student Residential Accommodation (ASRA)
College and University Business Officers (CUBO)
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG)
Two members from each of
Accreditation Network UK (ANUK)
Unipol
National Union of Students (NUS)
One member nominated from any supplier or manager with 2,000 or more bed spaces covered by the Codes
Six others to be elected from members with fewer than 2,000 bed spaces - 4 from members of the Code for Non-Educational Establishments and 2 from the Code for Educational Establishments.
The CoM shall normally meet not less than twice a year. The quorum is five.
The current membership is:
Chair
Richard Kington
Deputy Chair
Vacancy
Nominated organisations
Association of Colleges (AOC) - Vacant
The UK Student Services Organisation (AMOSSHE) - Emma Bales
Association of Student Residential Accommodation (ASRA) - Sarah Reynolds
College and University Business Officers (CUBO) - Michelle Christian
Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) - William Tandoh
Consortium members
Accreditation Network UK (ANUK) - Linda Cobb and a vacancy
National Union of Students (NUS) - Hannah Sketchley and a vacancy
Unipol Student Homes - Sam Bailey-Watts and Nikki Verity
One member nominated from any owner with 2,000 or more bed spaces covered by the Codes:
Abodus - TBC
Aparto Student - TBC
Cambridge Colleges - Wendy Evans
Campus Living Villages - Claire Robinson
Cloud Students - Jennifer Courtliff
Collegiate AC - Ashley Jones
Corporate Residential Management Limited (CRM) - Tracy Stanton
Downing Students - Tariq Akbar
Dwell Student - Andrea Seddon
Fresh - Jane Crouch
Greystar - Tom Starling
Hello Student - Matt Robinson
Homes for Students - Simon West
Host – Tony Allen
IQ Student Accommodation Services Ltd - Sarah Cowing
Kexgill - Silke Dent
Mansion Student - Nicola Dean
Mezzino - Anne-Marie Hawley
Now Student - Paul Watson
Sanctuary Students - Paul Hardy
Scape - Neil Smith
Student Castle - Eddie Kane
Student Living at Sodexo - Kelly Harland
Student Roost - Rachel Cartwright
True Student - Kirsty Neil
Unite - Lettie Hubbuck
UPP Projects Ltd- William McGillivray
University of Greenwich - Lesley Morrison
University of Hertfordshire - Diane Kendrick
University of Leeds - Chantelle Aleksander
Urbanest - Simon Hedley
Vita Student - Georgina Weir
Yugo - Tracy Stanton
Co-opted members
Linh Hawke - Southern Housing
Allan Hilton - Affordable Student Accommodation
Click here to view the previous minutes of the CoM.
Audit Panel
Decision-Making at the Audit Panel
The Audit Panel has a wide-ranging set of responsibilities and decision-making at the Audit Panel is determined by the Chair, following advice and information from the Deputy Chairs, members of the verification team and the staff team supporting the Audit Panel's considerations.
If urgent decisions are needed the Chair will take Chair's action outside of the Audit Panel meetings, such action to be reported to the Audit Panel and the Consortium at their first available meeting date.
In taking decisions, the Chair will often base those decisions on verifier's reported and recommendations made within them. The Chair is not responsible for the content of those reports, which are written by trained professionals, and takes their decisions involving the outcomes from membership applications and verification within the following framework:
the standing procedures
ensuring that verifiers' reports are presented in a standardised format
maintaining consistence and fairness between decisions taken in respect of different Code members
working on the basis that where a Code member is showing commitment to the Code and demonstrating progress towards full compliance, it is better to work with them, in a structured manner, than to suspend them
in the event that there are perceptions of risk related to health and safety, the Chair will need to be assured of mitigations put in place to address such issues whilst any wider issues are being resolved.
In the event that the Chair is unavailable or there is a conflict of interest, one of the Deputy Chairs will take on the responsibility of the Chair. The Chair, or National Codes Administrator, can determine which of the Deputy Chairs to nominate.
A standing agenda item appears on all Audit Panel agendas before any substantive business headed "Members Disclosures" where any Audit Panel member, or member of the verification team, with any perceived conflict of interest on any matters before the Audit Panel at that meeting should declare those possible interests. "Interests" are widely defined to include any interest, direct or indirect, and include the interests of any concerned party and some more information about disclosures is detailed here.
Appointments to the Audit Panel are made for three years (but can be renewed) and fees can be paid to its members, as agreed by the Consortium.
Members of the verification team undergo a substantial training programme and there are on-going initiatives to maintain expertise and consistency in the verification process, with more details available here.
Members of a verification team are invited to attend meetings of the Audit Panel when reports they have produced from visits are due to be discussed, in practice this means that verifiers attend most meetings (subject to their availability). Members of the verification team are appointed by the Audit Panel on the recommendation of the relevant member of staff at Unipol with responsibility for overseeing the operation of the Codes (who also has responsibility for undertaking any contractual obligations in respect of fees paid). The Chair of the Audit Panel and Unipol meet annually to review the effectiveness of the verifiers in respect of the terms and conditions of their appointment.
The Consortium can remove any verification team member at any time but must demonstrate a good cause for doing so.
The Audit Panel operates entirely separately and independently from the Committee of Management.
The Audit Panel is assisted by the Deputy Director Standards (NCA), the Membership and Engagement Manager, the National Codes Standards Manager, and (when possible non-compliance relating to complaints is being discussed) the Codes Complaints Investigator. In certain instances, the National Codes Administrator is charged with making recommendations to the Audit Panel for decision-making.
The current membership is:
Vacant (Chair)
Vacancies (Deputy Chairs)
Wendy Evans / Darren Smith (Cambridge Colleges)
Vacancy (NUS)
Victoria Tolmie-Loverseed (Unipol)
The current membership of the verification team who can attend meetings is:
Andy Attewell | Rachel Campey |
Derek Goss | Ross Halliday |
Richard Lord | Andrew Luck |
Philip Moxon | Sarah Nelson |
Beth Raine | David Robertson |
The self-assessment and verification process
Self-assessment involves applicants/existing members completing a standard questionnaire (SAQ) in which they are asked to assess themselves against a range of criteria.
Verification involves an independent professional verifier visiting a sample of the applicant’s/existing member’s portfolio and cross-checking claims made in the SAQ. Specifically, the verifier shall:
inspect and assess aspects of the physical fabric of the building and the management routines
interview existing tenants in order to form a view on the level of customer satisfaction.
Specified documentation within the Codes shall be provided to the verifier two weeks in advance of the visit.
The verification report
A verification report is issued after each visit.
In completing a verification report a verifier must reach a clear decision, recording conclusions on:
how an applicant/existing member’s self-assessment compares with the verifier’s conclusions
any work that must be undertaken to ensure compliance with the relevant Code and the timescale within which that work must be undertaken
whether a re-inspection is required and when this will take place
The NCA sends providers a draft copy of their verification report in order to give them an opportunity to correct errors before the report is formally issued. Providers are required to acknowledge receipt of the draft in writing within 14 days. If they fail to do so, the NCA shall send them a 14-day reminder, and if they fail to acknowledge within the additional time allowance, the NCA shall refer the matter to the Tribunal with a recommended course of action.
If any problems are identified by the report, these will remain between the parties for 30 days whilst the provider concerned has an opportunity to rectify these or dispute the report.
If there is a dispute over the wording of a verification report, which cannot be resolved between a provider and the verifier (operating in consultation with the Audit Panel), the NCA shall refer the matter to the Chair of the Tribunal for a decision. Records of the Tribunal process and its outcome are posted on the website and placed in the public domain.
The Consortium determines the format of the verification report.
The NCA holds all completed verification reports on file for six years.
Action Points
The verification report format includes a requirement for the logging of any Action Points. Where an Action Point is recorded, the verifier includes a timescale within which the provider must complete the action specified. The verifier follows up all Action Points they have formally identified and reports the outcomes to the Audit Panel.
For new members, where the verifier has stipulated a number of conditions, such as Action Points, the verifier shall have discretion to make a recommendation to award membership notwithstanding the works not yet having been undertaken.
Recommendations Made by Verifiers
The NCA refers verifiers’ recommendations on membership to the Audit Panel for confirmation. If the Audit Panel concludes that membership should not be awarded, the matter shall be referred to the Tribunal, which has sole authority to make decisions on refusal of membership. Where the Tribunal determines to suspend or not to award membership, or suspends a building or buildings the NCA shall, on its behalf, inform relevant local housing authorities and educational establishments.
Specifically, where a verification visit reveals issues with the physical conditions of a building, especially where the verifier believes these might constitute a statutory breach, a referral shall be made to the relevant local housing Authority.
In the case of existing members, if a serious issue of non-compliance arises, the Audit Panel may choose to suspend a building from Code cover for a period of time not to exceed 52 weeks (but ideally not more than 12 weeks). The Panel can extend an initial suspension in respect of specified buildings in a number of separate decisions within the overall time limit of 52 weeks.
The Tribunal will always be involved in making a recommendation about the removal or longer term suspension from the relevant Code. In considering such matters the Tribunal shall hear from all interested parties.
In the event of significant non-compliance by a new applicant, membership is normally not given until the relevant standard has been met.
Failure to complete any action points set by a verifier following a visit is also reported to the Audit Panel.
Verifiers [via the NCA] refer to the Audit Panel providers which have failed to complete Action Points within the deadlines set. The Audit Panel then decides on the appropriate action which may include:
warning(s) – to be reported to the CoM
immediate suspension of a building/s or a member prior to consideration by the Tribunal
a referral to the Tribunal
recommendation of expulsion from membership to the Tribunal
Notification of warnings and immediate suspensions are normally placed in the public domain and posted on the website.
The Chair of the Audit Panel can may take Chair's action on any of these matters between meetings following consultation with colleagues about any serious decision. When necessary or urgent, the Chairs can, however, take a decision on immediate suspension without such consultation, but will report this fact to other members of the Audit Panel as soon as possible thereafter.
Reporting of New Members
The NCA reports all new members to the Audit Panel and the Committee of Management at the earliest opportunity.
Developments Which Change Operational Management
Where developments change operational management, they are re-verified (even where the new manager is an existing member) before being added to the list of buildings covered by the relevant Code.
Continuing Verification
After being granted membership initially, a member has a further building verified every three years. Where a member has only one development or a small portfolio, re-verification of the same property may become necessary as part of the continuing verification process. However, for larger suppliers, buildings shall be selected from their portfolio for inspection within each three-year period of membership to ensure that a cross-section of their properties (including size, location and type) is verified. The NCA shall submit proposals to the Audit Panel for approval of which developments to verify and when.
Verification Visits Triggered by Complaints/Concerns
Complaints or concerns received by the NCA can trigger additional verification visits. The Audit Panel considers any request from a Consortium member for additional verification.
Status of the Verification Process
For the avoidance of doubt, the verification process does not directly test compliance with any statutory or contractual obligations and in no way absolves the providing organisation from their responsibilities to comply with such requirements.
Student Advisory Group
Terms of reference
To:
Provide student feedback on the current and future operation of the Codes
Suggest improvements to the Code
Advise on improving communications with students
Membership
All members shall be appointed for 2 years and must be current students or sabbatical officers as a condition of membership. There will be up to 8 members of this group and membership will be encouraged from students from different sizes and locations of educational institutions so that discussions take in factors which affect all types of students.
The Student Advisory Group will meet not less than 2 times per year and will be Chaired and serviced by the National Codes Co-ordinator.
The current membership is under review.
Complaints Tribunal System
The Tribunal
Chair’s and Vice-Chairs’ action
The Tribunal is the place of final resort for serious disputes. The full Tribunal sits only when it is required by the seriousness of a case (for instance where there are health and safety implications or allegations of dishonesty).
Wherever possible, complaints unresolvable by informal means will be dealt with by a referral from the NCA to the Chair of the Tribunal for Chair's action.
In the event of a more serious complaint the Chair can decide to take action following consultation with the two Vice-Chairs, who will either rule on the complaint or decide to refer the matter to a hearing of the full Tribunal.
Any Consortium member can insist on a complaint being heard by a full Tribunal.
The Tribunal system is administered and serviced by the National Codes Administrator, who will issue a report (to be agreed with the Chair) after each hearing in the format determined by the Consortium.
Process and membership
Tribunal hearings are normally held in the relevant town/city that the development is situated in.
The Tribunal and parties to the dispute will follow procedures determined by the Consortium and made public on the web.
The current membership is:
Chair
Ian Fletcher
Vice-Chairs
Keith White - CRM, Provider Rep
Hannah Sketchley - NUS, Student Rep
Three representatives from the Consortium
ANUK - Victoria Tolmie-Loverseed
NUS - Vacancy
Unipol - Nikki Verity
Three representatives from the owner community (to serve until November 1st 2027)
Jane Crouch - Fresh
Allan Hilton - Affordable Accommodation
Silke Dent - Kexgill
The person nominated by the appropriate local authority's environmental health department, the local students' union and the local education institution are nominated from where the complaint originates from, before the Tribunal hearing takes place.
The Consortium can remove any Tribunal member at any time.
Signing the Codes of Standards and public accountability
Adoption of the ANUK/Unipol Codes by a provider is voluntary. Signatories to a Code who fail to comply with its provisions risk this fact being made known to prospective tenants. Repeated breaches of the terms of a Code are formally displayed to prospective tenants. This may include publication.
Details of any complaints that are sustained by the Tribunal are made available for public view on the National Codes website. Results from the self-assessment and verification process which identify significant non-compliance, or a warning or temporary suspension given by the Audit Panel are also placed in the public domain.
Specialist Arrangements
If a complaint is referred to the Chair of the Tribunal and they decide that it should be heard by the Full Tribunal, no representative from the provider concerned will be eligible for membership of the Tribunal dealing with that particular complaint.
The Full Tribunal
Attendance
At least one member present must be a student (or a member of a student representative organisation) and the quorum shall be seven.
Providers and tenants involved in the case before the Tribunal are invited to attend. If the complainant and the respondent have difficulty attending the same meeting, every effort will be made, where possible, to allow each party a separate hearing before the Tribunal.
No legal representatives are allowed at the Tribunal for either owner or tenant. Each party is entitled to being accompanied or represented by a lay person.
Time limits on convening hearings
Tribunal hearings must be heard within three months of the Tribunal procedure being triggered, but preferably no longer than one month after the trigger. If either the provider or the complainant cannot attend within three months then the hearing will take place in the absence of that party.
Potential conflicts of interest
Any member of the Tribunal with a potential conflict of interest in a case before the Tribunal is required to declare it before the case is heard. The Tribunal shall decide whether that member should take part in that appeal hearing or not. In the event of a tie the Chair shall have a casting vote.
Decision-making powers
The Tribunal can make one of seven decisions, once it has completed the process of considering a complaint. It can:
reject the complaint
issue a warning letter
publish the failure of a member to meet standards set within the appropriate Code
decide that a further compliance check is undertaken or conditions are attached to continued membership
suspend a building or buildings by an existing member from the relevant Code for a specified period of time (not to exceed 52 weeks)
suspend a member for a specified time
expel the member from the relevant Code
The Tribunal can also make recommendations to other parties - such as the relevant local authority and educational institutions.
In the event that a complaint from a student is deemed by the Tribunal to be malicious, a referral is likely to be made to the student's educational institution with a recommendation for formal disciplinary proceedings.
All upheld complaints, suspensions and expulsions are published on the National Codes website.
The Tribunal is not empowered to make any monetary awards, although certain clauses in the Codes relating to building works carry financial obligations to tenants. The primary aim of the complaints procedures is to hold members who have voluntarily signed-up to the requirements of the Codes to account should they be found not to have met with the standards as set in those Codes. Where the aim of those bringing a complaint is to seek compensation from the accommodation provider, this should be made apparent within the complaint, and the complainant should be aware that such an outcome may not be possible.
Any decision of the Tribunal will be confirmed in writing.
The decision of the Tribunal is final.
Although any of these bodies may review an earlier decision in the light of additional information there is no appeals system.
The Tribunal Chair
The Tribunal Chair is appointed by the Consortium (with a remuneration to be agreed by them) together with two Vice-Chairs who are appointed by the CoM. All serve for three years. The Chair of the Tribunal can only be removed following dismissal by the Consortium. Other members can be removed by the CoM with a two-thirds majority or by the Consortium
The Tribunal meets annually for training purposes. At that meeting members will receive a report from the Chair of the Tribunal on any cases where Chair's action has been taken during that year, for informal discussion and comment by the Tribunal.
Relationship between the Audit Panel and Tribunal
All decisions concerning the removal of membership from either of the Codes are matters for either the Audit Panel or the Tribunal to consider. Both have powers to suspend the member or individual buildings from a Code whilst the matter is considered more fully.
If a member or building is removed or suspended from membership of any Code, any decision as to when that member may be permitted to re-apply for membership will be a matter for the Tribunal. In the event that the Tribunal makes no decision or an earlier decision is extant, then the CoM will decide this.
Both bodies will receive reports on the activities of each other every time that they meet.
Role of National Codes Administrator in administering the complaints and tribunal system
The National Codes Administrator shall:
operate the complaints system in accordance with the procedure determined by the Consortium
ensure that the complaints system is properly publicised and that those wishing to make a complaint know how to do so
be satisfied that all complaints have been acknowledged and that responses have been received from all providers against whom a formal complaint has been lodged
Specialist arrangements
In situations where complaints are made under the Codes against either Unipol itself or involving providers who sit on the Tribunal, instead of the National Codes undertaking the initial investigation of a complaint, this role is fulfilled by the Chair of the CoM OR his or her nominee.
If the complaint is subsequently referred to the Chair of the Tribunal, and they decide that it should be subject to a hearing of the full Tribunal, then no representative from the provider concerned will be eligible for membership of the Tribunal dealing with that particular hearing.