But setting aside whether it will end up doing so once it’s been through the Lords, a proposed government amendment establishes an anticipated carve-out for halls.

New government-proposed Clause 34 of the Bill proposes that Purpose-Built Student Accommodation adhering to an approved code would not be classified as “Assured Tenancies” and so fall outside RRB regulations.

The exemption would allow PBSA providers under these codes to continue to lock students in for a year in fixed-term tenancies, and demand more than a month’s rent upfront – both will be banned in off-street housing.

You might argue that that split is inevitable. But once that split is done, there’s then a further three-way split (in England) over rights within PBSA itself, leading to potentially four different regimes overall when including students renting standard houses.

There’s the ANUK/Unipol National Code for non-educational providers (private halls). There’s the ANUK/Unipol National Code for educational establishments (some university halls). And there’s the Universities UK (UUK)/GuildHE Code of Practice (also for university-managed accommodation).

And naturally the codes differ in rights, governance, enforcement, and scrutiny, so student protections can vary significantly depending on which code their provider follows.

The line between “university halls” and “private halls” can be blurred on the ground. Plenty of private halls operate under nomination agreements with universities, so the university allocates students to these privately managed buildings – that can make them appear as official university accommodation.

Unipol started consulting this week on changes to the non-educational (private) PBSA Code. If agreed, the changes will give students the right to withdraw from their tenancy agreement with 4 weeks’ notice if they permanently withdraw from their course or suspend their studies due to significant ill-health (absence over 60 days).

Providers under this code would also have to comply with government’s Damp and Mould guidance, with specific investigation and remediation timelines proposed, and there’s a new section on complaints.

So students in houses will have broad rights to leave, students in private halls will have the right to leave only under specific circumstances (illness/dropping out), and students in university PBSA will have no formal right to leave unless the university establishes those rights itself.

When new accommodation isn’t ready on time, compensation varies. Proposed changes to the National Code for private providers and the existing ANUK National Code for educational establishments include compensation. The UUK/GuildHE Code requires providers to offer alternative accommodation and support but doesn’t specify compensation amounts. And there’s no equivalent universal right under the Renters’ Rights Bill.

Internal fines and service disconnections are treated differently. The National Code for private providers and the UUK/GuildHE Code bans internal fines and prohibits withdrawing essential services due to rent arrears. The National Code for educational establishments doesn’t explicitly ban those practices. The Tenants Fees Act does in houses.

Private halls, under the proposed non-educational code changes, will be required to follow the government’s Code of Practice for residential building safety remediation. The educational codes address remediation but don’t mandate that government code.

The proposed non-educational Code includes specific provisions for investigating damp and mould hazards within set timelines and explicit requirements for communal cleaning, mail handling, furniture, and laundry. The educational codes do cover areas like mail, furniture, laundry and cleaning arrangements, but they lack specific requirements found in the proposed private code changes.

The ANUK Educational Code mandates residential staffing ratios (one staff member per 250 students for larger developments) and requires proper training before staff commence duties. This ratio requirement is not present in the UUK/GuildHE code or the National Code for private providers.

We’ll also end up with four complaints regimes, because of course we will.

I could go on.

If there must be different rules for PBSA, what is obviously needed is for the grown-ups to get in a room and agree a single, clear, national framework that covers all types of student housing – public and private – and establishes minimum standards that apply universally.

Then we can tell students what their rights are, and how to enforce them.

And if we are to avoid a mass move away from halls in general into off-street housing (something surely nobody was intending), parity over the right to leave a contract with every other citizen in the UK really needs sorting sharpish.