Arthritic student fails in bid to sue Victoria University for kicking him out of hall

A severely arthritic student has failed in his bid to sue Victoria University for $35,000 after it placed him a hall that meant he had to endure a “painful” walk uphill to get to class.

Taiming Zhang, 22, alleged that because he was placed in a hall further from the campus, the university had indirectly discriminated against him.

He described the Wellington campus as being “virtually on a mountain”, meaning he had to endure a “painful” walk uphill to get there.

The university changed the rules for many of its halls of residence in 2021, restricting access to its fully-catered accommodation to any students over the age of 20.

Zhang took the university to the Human Rights Review Tribunal in April this year hoping to to have $17,000 in hall fees refunded, and a further $18,000 in compensation and transport costs paid to him.

However, the tribunal has now ruled the university did not discriminate against him by introducing its new age-restriction policy, and declined to award Zhang any compensation.

At the hearing Zhang said he had severe arthritis in his big toe and on this basis the university had discriminated against him because most of the halls that didn’t have an age restriction were located further away from the campus and had limited public transport available.

Zhang claimed the closest bus stops to his accommodation were further away than advertised and the routes the buses took were indirect and required multiple transfers. He instead took Ubers to get to his classes.

“I tried everything for them to not put me in the worst hall possible for a disabled student, yet they still did,” he told the tribunal.

The university changed its age policy for halls of residence in 2021.

“My difficulty in hill climbing was made clear to the university accommodation, yet the university refused to put me anywhere else.”

However, Victoria University submitted Zhang did not bring his arthritis to the attention of staff until a year into his time at the institution. It claimed as soon as they were made aware, it helped him find suitable accommodation closer to the campus.

Zhang attended a non-catered hall in 2020 before being moved after he made multiple complaints and was moved to a fully-catered hall.

He applied to stay in that same hall but was told a new policy meant he was too old. He asked for alternatives before telling the university he had “severe arthritis” and the options they provided were not acceptable. The university says this was the first time they were told of his condition.

It then found him a flat on the same road as the main campus.

Stephanie Cottrill, associate director of student accommodation for the university, told the tribunal the policy was to limit the age gap between the students and to respond to reports of coercive relationships between students.

Zhang’s primary argument against the university’s age policy was that residential advisers - who were employed by it to provide pastoral care and advice to first-year students - were over the age of 20 and were allowed to live in the halls and used the same bathrooms and common areas as the students.

In its decision released today, the tribunal found Zhang’s primary argument failed because residential advisers were present to support rather than undermine age restriction policies at university halls, and also made up only a small percentage of the occupants.

“In the case of Capital Hall, for example, there are only 10 RAs employed to provide support to 390 students, meaning RAs make up only 2.5 per cent of the total number of students (including RAs) who reside at Capital Hall. Their presence does not alter the overwhelming segregated nature of these catered halls,” their decision reads.

The tribunal said that while Zhang’s claim ultimately failed, it represented a significant change in circumstances that adversely affected him and also raised an important issue of public interest that required answering.

Jeremy Wilkinson is an Open Justice reporter based in Manawatū covering courts and justice issues with an interest in tribunals. He has been a journalist for nearly a decade and has worked for NZME since 2022.