Hansard

This has been an excellent debate in which all members have made quite heartfelt pleas for legislation. That is not always the case in this chamber.

As Jim Tolson pointed out, owners need early information about their property factor and the services that they can expect to receive because the lack of such information simply stores up problems for the future. After all, as Sandra White and Paul Martin made clear, owners have every right to know what they are being charged for.

The fact that one of constituents’ main complaints about property factors relates, as we have heard, to the quality of their work and that people often want to know how to complain about unsatisfactory work demonstrates the need for home owners and property factors to have a clear understanding of the agreed level of service and of how to raise and get an adequate response to complaints when the level of service is inadequate. I, like many other members, would welcome a code of conduct for property factors. I welcome Patricia Ferguson’s willingness to discuss the code of conduct further, but I also think that the opportunity for the Scottish ministers to consult on the code before laying it before Parliament will ensure that the views of all parties—factors and those who receive their services—on how to make it most effective are heard.

Malcolm Chisholm, Elizabeth Smith and other members have, in today’s debate and in earlier debates on the issue, highlighted examples of property factors’ failure to deliver an adequate service. Sections 15 to 20 provide a framework for properly resolving disputes, section 17 sets out the referral process for complaints and section 15 confers on the private rented housing panel and committees—as the renamed home owner housing panel and home owner housing committees—additional functions to deal with such complaints. As Duncan McNeil said, we are still uncertain about the costs of the panel, but I accept Patricia Ferguson’s reassurances that she will provide further information on the issue at stage 2. I know that some members were attracted to the ombudsman option, but I agree with Malcolm Chisholm that there is more certainty about the home owner housing panel and therefore I support that approach. That said, I agree with Robert Brown that whatever system is put in place it should be clear and enforceable.

I have to say that I never thought that switching was the bill’s main aim. I appreciate David McLetchie’s view that that could raise standards, although I would hope that such issues would be addressed in the code of conduct. As Bob Doris pointed out, switching takes time and energy and I am sure that home owners would rather spend their time and energy on something more pleasurable. In any case, having to switch is actually a sign of failure and should therefore be avoided. Nevertheless, the option to switch must be available to ensure that the point of deregistration is fully carried through. I agree that the process must be made more straightforward. Allowing for time to elapse might help people find a replacement. We certainly have to address what happens when the property factor owns the land. Indeed, the issue has been raised constantly this afternoon and I am sure that we will make every effort to address it at stage 2.

At the beginning of the debate, I said that I sincerely welcome the bill. Let me be clear: I believe that property factors play a vital role in managing tenements, flatted properties and open spaces. I qualify that by saying that I am not completely convinced that the property factors whom I have come across have the necessary expertise to manage sophisticated drainage systems, for example, but in general I see the need for property factor services.

Some people, including some of my constituents, have suggested that owners could fulfil the role, but my experience is that it is difficult to make that work. I have also heard people say that local authorities should take on the role. As we have already heard, some do, but that means an additional cost. I cannot see any local authority being desperate to take on that responsibility for all council tax payers at no additional cost. Therefore, it seems that it is important that we have in place a framework that encourages and supports good and responsible property factors and puts out of business rogue factors who do not fulfil their part of the deal and try to exploit owners financially, and that framework should be supported by legislation.

I look forward to working with local government colleagues in our stage 2 deliberations to address the points that have been made today. Far too many people in Scotland are suffering because of rogue factors. I am sure that the bill will assist them, and I hope that we can move quickly so that they do not have to wait much longer for a resolution.

17:11