‘I’m missing out’: the cash-strapped UK university students forced to live at home | Universities

Meryem spends hours most days waiting.

The 19-year-old University College London student usually finishes her classes in the middle of the morning but attends careers events or community meetings in the evenings. The three-hour round trip to his parents’ house means it doesn’t make much sense to travel back and forth, so he waits on campus instead. Often, once the activity begins, he is too exhausted to stay long.

Meryem, who lives at home because she can’t afford the London rent, says she “definitely suffers from not having the best social life”. “But living at home will also affect my future because I miss out on career opportunities (spontaneous, after-work coffees, meetings and events) that people who live outside take for granted,” she adds.

Meryem (not her real name) is part of a growing group of students living at home rather than going to university. A report published this week found that 52 per cent of undergraduates in England’s poorest neighborhoods expected to live at home during their studies, compared to 18 per cent in the least deprived areas.

The Solution Foundation, which published the figures in its annual intergenerational audit, said rising rents and living costs were increasingly shaping university choices.

For some students, staying at home also has its positive aspects. James Davies, an undergraduate student at the University of Leicester, believes that living at home is in his favor because, unlike Mariam, he does not have to work to pay the rent. “I don’t think I made too many sacrifices. People I know who moved away for college had to do paid work outside of classes, so they didn’t have time to study.”

David Willetts, president of the Resolution Foundation, said where students choose to live can shape not only their college experience but also the opportunities and networks that impact the rest of their lives. “Our report shows that rather than being a free choice, living with parents is driven by financial constraints, evenly distributed across the income distribution,” he said.

Carl Cullinane, director of research and policy at the Sutton Trust, said: “Young people from disadvantaged backgrounds are increasingly having to limit their higher education options due to concerns about costs.”

Research Center for Longitudinal Studies It shows that 37% of potential students planning to live at home choose a Russell Group university, while 56% of those planning to move elsewhere support this result.

“Is going to a local college better than not going to college at all? Yes,” Cullinane said. “But since you can’t afford to go to another university, is it best to attend a local university? No.”

Alex Stanley, vice-president of the National Union of Students, said: “While moving away from home is not a prerequisite for having a valuable university experience, everyone should have the option of going out to go to university, given that there are geographical restrictions on what courses are available.”

Rose Stephenson, director of policy and strategy at the Higher Education Policy Institute (Hepi), criticized a funding system that allows students living away from home (outside London) to borrow £10,830 a year towards living costs, while those living with their parents borrow £9,118, despite average annual student rents exceeding £7,500.

“We have a funding system that assumes students can rely on family support, a housing market that makes moving unaffordable, and policymakers still speak as if the traditional residential college experience is the norm,” he said.

Lucy Haire, director of sector engagement at the UPP Foundation, will publish a report on this topic next month. He warned against overlooking the benefits of residential college life, arguing that “for many students, the opportunity to study elsewhere remains transformative.”

But Nick Hillman, director of Hepi, warned against the assumption that living at home is necessarily a disadvantage. “For some students, staying home can mean less debt, stronger family support and more time to focus on their studies,” she said.

“The question is whether students will have access to high-quality education and whether they will be successful once they get there. If living at home makes that possible for more people, then this is simply not a problem that needs to be solved.”