September 13, 2012
This summer, a bill for my Hamilton tuition arrived, including an itemized list of charges I had incurred to date. One of them on the list simply read “CHAIR x4 – COMMON ROOM.” Next to it, a charge for $50.
Now $50 isn’t exactly a fortune compared with the high costs of tuition for Hamilton that many of us have to pay. But I figured I’d investigate anyway – I didn’t think I should have to pay a damage charge if I had nothing to do with that damage.
My Area Director informed me that I, along with the other seven previous residents of Milbank 16, had each been charged for four of our common room chairs because they had been missing for our RA’s room inspection at the end of senior week. This came as a surprise to me, because when I had moved out before senior week, all of the chairs had been there.
A friend of mine later informed me that people who live in the suites tend to steal chairs from common rooms at the end of the year to replace their own (why they would need to is beyond me… did they get angry and throw it at a wall or something?).
Once I figured out that this was probably what had happened, I decided to appeal my damage charge. I was able to get it removed from my bill, which I am thankful for. At the time, I also decided to look into ResLife policy to see why exactly they had initially charged me.
The Student Handbook reads: “As a member of the college community, I am responsible for all college-owned items in my assigned space and agree to accept financial responsibility for room condition and damaged or missing items.”
It later continues: “When damage occurs within my residence hall and the responsible party is unknown, costs will be prorated among all building, suite or apartment residents.”
I’m assuming that I signed this housing agreement before I came to Hamilton, but since then it has faded from my memory and probably from many others’ as well. My guess is that a Hamilton administrator thought that this policy was grounds to charge me and my suite mates for the missing chairs. But I would argue that this doesn’t seem very fair.
As many of you probably know, suites are strange in that they have common spaces that are intended for use by you and your suitemates but that aren’t really ‘yours.’ They don’t have locks, and though the doors close, anyone can walk through them as they please. This will happen often on weekends, especially in first floor suites when it starts to get cold out.
So although my suite may have been my “assigned space,” I don’t think I should have been held responsible for what happened to some of the property in it, especially since it happened after I had already moved out. In the end I wasn’t, but that’s not the point.
If certain policies had been enforced differently, my e-mail exchange and phone-tag with Ashley Place could have been avoided altogether.
The College needs to refine its dorm damage policy in regards to the suites. I understand that at the end of the day, someone should be held responsible for stuff if it goes missing. But obviously, people in suites can’t be around all the time to watch it, and they can’t lock it, so that ‘someone’ shouldn’t be them.
The College has been responsive to past complaints about security in the suites by outfitting the fridges to support locks. There may not be such an easy fix for other security issues in the suite common rooms like those I have mentioned thus far.
However, if there is no way to make common rooms more secure, then students using them should not be held responsible if college furniture goes missing, plain and simple.