Few Students Have Returned Suite Cards

Only about 40 per cent of suite evaluation cards distributed by the University this fall have been returned, Francis A. Lwton, assistant dean of facilities, said yesterday.

The cards, given to students during the first week of school, ask them to evaluate the physical condition of their suites so that the University will be able to assess damaged at the end of the year.

Students will have to pay for the repair of damage in their suites, even if they do not incur the damage, unless they return the cards, Lawton said. He added that he will assume that the suites are in excellent condition if the cards are not returned.

"We're trying to protect the student who is living in conditions he's not responsible for," Lawton said.

Until this year, maintenance costs were absorbed by room rent, Lawton said, adding that students who did not damage their rooms paid for part of the damage others incurred in other suites.

Under thi syear's system, if a room has to be repainted or replastered and its occupants did not return their suite condition card, they will have to pay for the damage even if they did not cause it.

Lawton said that the University spends between $400,000 and $500,000 each year for repainting in the Houses. By charging students damage in their suite, Lawton estimates that he could save the University about $200,000.

Lawton said he asked House superintendents to post a sign in every suite warning occupants that they would be assessed full cost for repairing damage done to their suite if they did not fill out their suite condition cards.

An informal survey of students yesterday showed that the warning had not been posted in many suites.

An ad hoc subcommittee on housing of the Committee on Housing and Undergraduate Life recommended earlier this year that if too many House residents failed to hand in their cards, students should have to deposit one month's room rent that would be used to pay for any damage to their room.

Lawton said he doesn't like the proposed deposit system because students would lose access to the money for one year and because it would cause administrative problems for his office.