Hansard

On behalf of the Liberal Democrats, I praise Patricia Ferguson for introducing the bill and for the manner in which she has done so. Although this debate will receive less publicity than others that we have had in the chamber, it addresses an issue that is much more important to many people, in Glasgow and other parts of the country, than many of the subjects that we deal with in this chamber.

When I was first elected as a Glasgow councillor, many years ago, the quality of factors and complaints about factoring services was a significant matter. Dissatisfaction levels were high. It is true that, in intervening years, the nature of the property market has changed considerably, as have tenure patterns. The condition of the fabric in the old red sandstone buildings, for example, has been immeasurably improved. There are more owner-occupiers and more split-ownership properties, which is an important issue. Councils and Glasgow Housing Association, for example, are involved in dealing with private owners in a way that they rarely were under previous systems. As Malcolm Chisholm pointed out, we have more new flats that come with complex provisions in the deeds of conditions for factoring-type arrangements. Throughout those massive changes, levels of satisfaction with factors have remained low and complaints have remained high; that is the background to the bill.

It is important to remember that not every issue is the fault of the factor. If a major roofing repair is thwarted because someone will not pay their share up front or even accept liability for it, that is the fault not of the factor, but of the owners or the system. There can be infelicities in the deeds of conditions that render arrangements for maintaining grassed areas difficult to enforce and to fund.

Sometimes, dare I say it, the factoring costs—not just the fees, but the outlay of expenditure—lead to a situation in which the level of service is poor and the charges are relatively low, although higher than they should be for that level of service. The issue of the service that is provided should in some cases be at the centre of the argument.

As Bob Doris rightly said, the matter of the unwilling payer is a central point. The provision of some clarity through the standards and conditions that the Scottish Government has put in place would assist in informing people so that they understand and appreciate the things for which they should rightly be paying, as opposed to the things for which they are wrongly charged in some situations at present.

In many former council tenements, the council, or the GHA as its successor in Glasgow, holds a majority of the votes because it owns five out of eight houses in the block, for example. There can be arguments about whether the council or the GHA uses that monopoly control in a way that reflects the interests of the minority of home owners, to whom it also has factoring duties. There are complex problems that impact on neighbours of houses in multiple occupation, houses that are let from landlords and houses that are managed by letting companies for owners or landlords. There can be problems with antisocial conduct or harassment from some occupants and their families, whether they are owners or tenants. All those things, while they are not strictly factoring issues, are very much interrelated, which makes it difficult.

I think that Patricia Ferguson has had some dealings with residents in sheltered housing facilities, such as Stonelaw Court in Rutherglen, where there are factoring facilities that deal not only with lifts and such things, but with aspects such as liability in the title deeds for a house manager’s flat and support. That is much wider than what we might regard as traditional factoring services.

It is important that in considering those questions of definition we take on board not only the concerns to do with the Greenbelt Group, but some of the sheltered housing problems too. The landscape is complex: the definition of the factual situation of who is responsible for what can be difficult, and the property title rights can be confused, outdated or inadequate.

The Property Factors (Scotland) Bill is not a solution to the panoply of challenges, but it is a significant contribution in a discrete area. As we have heard, it raises a number of areas of interest such as definitions, the need for a compulsory register, the vital importance of an accreditation scheme and the enforcement mechanisms under that scheme.

The bill’s intention is to cover registered social landlords, which is right. I am a strong supporter of housing associations, especially community-based ones, but the GHA in particular has had a lot of issues with its factoring side in relation to the clarity of information that is provided, the basis of charges, hidden commissions and various other things. It is important that the GHA is subject to a proper regime, with proper attention given to issues of overregulation and other such matters.

Many of the arguments have been about whether the scheme should be voluntary or compulsory; I will put it slightly differently. The accreditation scheme that is being developed by the Government and the Property Factors Association Scotland is entirely central to what is needed and it should be professionally operated by the professional body. However, it must be backed up by compulsion. The public need to know who the firms that operate in that field are, that they have been approved as being fit to provide factoring services and that there are effective mechanisms for securing redress if there are problems.

On the point about enforcement, the warning about the expense of court actions is correct, but the alternative dispute resolution format—whatever it should be—must be robust, speedy and unbureaucratic, and it must end up with some sort of enforceable order, against the background of issues with unwilling payers. There must be clarity on that.

Like other members, I am not sure that the ombudsman approach would be best, but it is undoubtedly desirable to have an effective mechanism that does the trick without too much bureaucracy or legalism. Clarity of information is important in that regard.

In conclusion, the Property Factors (Scotland) Bill is important and I congratulate Patricia Ferguson on introducing it. She has done a service to the Parliament and to many parts of Scotland. No doubt we will sort out a number of the technical issues at stage 2, and it is important that the bill is passed during the current parliamentary session.

17:00