Draft revised code of conduct for registered property factors: consultation analysis

This report presents an analysis of responses to the consultation on a draft revised code of conduct for registered property factors.


Annex 2: Quantitative Analysis

Table 2: Responses to Question 1 by respondent type

Do you think the original Code of Conduct for property factors has led to improvements in the quality of factoring services provided to homeowners by property factors?

Type of respondent Significant improvement Slight improvement No improvement Unsure Not answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group   1     1 2
Property Factor 28 26 1 5 2 62
Representative or Professional Body 1 4     3 8
Other   1       1
Total organisations 29 32 1 5 6 73
% of organisations answering 43% 48% 1% 7%    
Individuals 7 5 5 9 3 29
% of individuals answering 27% 19% 19% 35%    
All respondents 36 37 6 14 9 102
% of all respondents 35% 36% 6% 14% 9%  
% of all those answering 39% 40% 6% 15%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 3: Responses to Question 2 by respondent type

Does the Code’s introductory text clearly explain its purpose, who it applies to and the broader regulatory background?

Type of respondent Yes No Unsure Not
answered
Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group 1     1 2
Property Factor 52 6 2 2 62
Representative or Professional Body 2 1 1 4 8
Other 1       1
Total organisations 56 7 3 7 73
% of organisations answering 85% 11% 5%    
Individuals 17 6 4 2 29
% of individuals answering 63% 22% 15%    
All respondents 73 13 7 9 102
% of all respondents 72% 13% 7% 9%  
% of all those answering  78% 14% 8%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 4: Responses to Question 3 by respondent by type

As published as part of this consultation, would you keep the themes of the revised Code (as drafted); change the wording of the themes in the revised Code (as drafted); propose any additional themes to the revised Code; remove any themes in the revised Code (as drafted)?

Type of respondent Keep the themes as drafted Change the wording Propose additional themes Unsure Not answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group   1 1     2
Property Factor 50 3 6 2 1 62
Representative or Professional Body 3       5 8
Other 1         1
Total organisations 54 4 7 2 6 73
% of organisations answering 81% 6% 10% 3%    
Individuals 15 2 7 1 4 29
% of individuals answering 60% 8% 28% 4%    
All respondents 69 6 14 3 10 102
% of all respondents 68% 6% 14% 3% 10%  
% of all those answering 75% 7% 15% 3%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 5: Responses to Question 4a by respondent type

As published as part of this consultation, would you: keep the requirements of Section 1 of the revised Code (as drafted); or change any requirement(s) of Section 1 of the revised Code?

Type of respondent

Keep the requirements

as drafted

Change any requirements

Unsure

Not

answered

Total

Organisations:

Community or Resident’s Group

1

1

   

2

Property Factor

18

38

3

3

62

Representative or Professional Body

1

4

 

3

8

Other

1

     

1

Total organisations

21

43

3

6

73

% of organisations answering

31%

64%

4%

   

Individuals

12

10

3

4

29

% of individuals answering

48%

40%

12%

   

All respondents

33

53

6

10

102

% of all respondents

32%

52%

6%

10%

 

% of all those answering 

36%

58%

7%

   

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 6: Responses to Question 4b by respondent type

Should the format and structure of the written statement of service be standardised as part of any proposed changes to the Code?

Type of respondent Yes No Unsure Not  answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group 1     1 2
Property Factor 29 24 6 3 62
Representative or Professional Body 1 1 3 3 8
Other     1   1
Total organisations 31 25 10 7 73
% of organisations answering 47% 38% 15%    
Individuals 14 9 2 4 29
% of individuals answering 56% 36% 8%    
All respondents 45 34 12 11 102
% of all respondents 44% 33% 12% 11%  
% of all those answering 49% 37% 13%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 7: Responses to Question 5 by respondent type

As published as part of this consultation, would you: keep the requirements of Section 2 of the revised Code (as drafted); or change any requirement(s) of Section 2 of the revised Code?

Type of respondent Keep the requirements as drafted Change any requirements Unsure Not answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group   1   1 2
Property Factor 27 30 3 2 62
Representative or Professional Body   5   3 8
Other   1     1
Total organisations 27 37 3 6 73
% of organisations answering 40% 55% 4%    
Individuals 14 9 2 4 29
% of individuals answering 56% 36% 8%    
All respondents 41 46 5 10 102
% of all respondents 40% 45% 5% 10%  
% of all those answering 45% 50% 5%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 8: Responses to Question 6 by respondent type

As published as part of this consultation, would you: keep the requirements of Section 3 of the revised Code (as drafted); or change any requirement(s) of Section 3 of the revised Code?

Type of respondent Keep the requirements as drafted Change any requirements Unsure Not answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group 1     1 2
Property Factor 32 26 1 3 62
Representative or Professional Body 1 2   5 8
Other 1       1
Total organisations 35 28 1 9 73
% of organisations answering 55% 44% 2%    
Individuals 13 8 4 4 29
% of individuals answering 52% 32% 16%    
All respondents 48 36 5 13 102
% of all respondents 47% 35% 5% 13%  
% of all those answering 54% 40% 6%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 9: Responses to Question 7 by respondent type

As published as part of this consultation, would you: keep the requirements of Section 4 of the revised Code (as drafted); or change any requirement(s) of Section 4 of the revised Code?

Type of respondent Keep the requirements as drafted Change any requirements Unsure Not answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group 1 1     2
Property Factor 44 13 2 3 62
Representative or Professional Body 1 2   5 8
Other 1       1
Total organisations 47 16 2 8 73
% of organisations answering 72% 25% 3%    
Individuals 13 8 4 4 29
% of individuals answering 52% 32% 16%    
All respondents 60 24 6 12 102
% of all respondents 59% 24% 6% 12%  
% of all those answering 67% 27% 7%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 10: Responses to Question 8 by respondent type

As published as part of this consultation, would you: keep the requirements of Section 5 of the revised Code (as drafted); or change any requirement(s) of Section 5 of the revised Code?

Type of respondent Keep the requirements as drafted Change any requirements Unsure Not answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group 1     1 2
Property Factor 40 17 2 3 62
Representative or Professional Body 1 2   5 8
Other     1   1
Total organisations 42 19 3 9 73
% of organisations answering 66% 30% 5%    
Individuals 10 11 3 5 29
% of individuals answering 42% 46% 13%    
All respondents 52 30 6 14 102
% of all respondents 51% 29% 6% 14%  
% of all those answering 59% 34% 7%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 11: Responses to Question 9 by respondent type

As published as part of this consultation, would you: keep the requirements of Section 6 of the revised Code (as drafted); or change any requirement(s) of Section 6 of the revised Code?

Type of respondent Keep the requirements as drafted Change any requirements Unsure Not answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group   2     2
Property Factor 47 11 1 3 62
Representative or Professional Body 2 1   5 8
Other   1     1
Total organisations 49 15 1 8 73
% of organisations answering 75% 23% 2%    
Individuals 12 11 2 4 29
% of individuals answering 48% 44% 8%    
All respondents 61 26 3 12 102
% of all respondents 60% 25% 3% 12%  
% of all those answering 68% 29% 3%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 12: Responses to Question 10a by respondent type

As published as part of this consultation, would you: keep the requirements of Section 7 of the revised Code (as drafted); or change any requirement(s) of Section 7 of the revised Code?

Type of respondent Keep the requirements as drafted Change any requirements Unsure Not answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group 1     1 2
Property Factor 29 29 2 2 62
Representative or Professional Body 1 3   4 8
Other       1 1
Total organisations 31 32 2 8 73
% of organisations answering 48% 49% 3%    
Individuals 16 7 2 4 29
% of individuals answering 64% 28% 8%    
All respondents 47 39 4 12 102
% of all respondents 46% 38% 4% 12%  
% of all those answering 52% 43% 4%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 13: Responses to Question 10b by respondent type

Should the procedures for complaints handling be standardised as part of any proposed changes to the Code?

Type of respondent Yes No Unsure Not  answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group 2       2
Property Factor 19 36 5 2 62
Representative or Professional Body   2 1 5 8
Other 1       1
Total organisations 22 38 6 7 73
% of organisations answering 33% 58% 9%    
Individuals 13 7 5 4 29
% of individuals answering 52% 28% 20%    
All respondents 35 45 11 11 102
% of all respondents 34% 44% 11% 11%  
% of all those answering 38% 49% 12%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 14: Responses to Question 12 by respondent type

For the limited purposes described above, should a de-registered property factor, be required to comply with the Code, including property factor enforcement orders, despite removal from the register of property factors?

Type of respondent Yes No Unsure Not  answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group 1     1 2
Property Factor 46 6 8 2 62
Representative or Professional Body 3     5 8
Other     1   1
Total organisations 50 6 9 8 73
% of organisations answering 77% 9% 14%    
Individuals 21 1 1 6 29
% of individuals answering 91% 4% 4%    
All respondents 71 7 10 14 102
% of all respondents 70% 7% 10% 14%  
% of all those answering 81% 8% 11%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 15: Responses to Question 13 by respondent type

Should a three-year time limit be introduced for homeowner applications to be initially lodged with the First-tier Tribunal for Scotland Housing and Property Chamber?

Type of respondent Yes No Unsure Not  answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group   1   1 2
Property Factor 38 15 7 2 62
Representative or Professional Body 3     5 8
Other     1   1
Total organisations 41 16 8 8 73
% of organisations answering 63% 25% 12%    
Individuals 15 3 6 5 29
% of individuals answering 63% 13% 25%    
All respondents 56 19 14 13 102
% of all respondents 55% 19% 14% 13%  
% of all those answering 63% 21% 16%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 16: Responses to Question 14a by respondent type

Are there any proposals in this consultation which have any financial, regulatory or resource implications for you and/or your business (if applicable)?

Type of respondent Yes No Unsure Not  answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group   1   1 2
Property Factor 43 10 6 3 62
Representative or Professional Body 3 1   4 8
Other     1   1
Total organisations 46 12 7 8 73
% of organisations answering 71% 18% 11%    
Individuals 8 6 11 4 29
% of individuals answering 32% 24% 44%    
All respondents 54 18 18 12 102
% of all respondents 53% 18% 18% 12%  
% of all those answering 60% 20% 20%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 17: Responses to Question 14b by respondent type

Are there any proposals in this consultation which impact or have implications on ‘equality groups’?

Type of respondent Yes No Unsure Not  answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group   1   1 2
Property Factor 3 52 4 3 62
Representative or Professional Body   1 1 6 8
Other   1     1
Total organisations 3 55 5 10 73
% of organisations answering 5% 87% 8%    
Individuals 2 14 8 5 29
% of individuals answering 8% 58% 33%    
All respondents 5 69 13 15 102
% of all respondents 5% 68% 13% 15%  
% of all those answering 6% 79% 15%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding.

Table 18: Responses to Question 15 by respondent type

In addition to the Code, do you think the wider requirements of the Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011 (2011 Act) has led to improvements in the regulation of property factors?

Type of respondent Significant improvement Slight improvement No improvement Unsure Not answered Total
Organisations:
Community or Resident’s Group   1     1 2
Property Factor 28 25   5 4 62
Representative or Professional Body   2     6 8
Other   1       1
Total organisations 28 29 0 5 11 73
% of organisations answering 45% 47% 0% 8%    
Individuals 8 4 6 5 6 29
% of individuals answering 35% 17% 26% 22%    
All respondents 36 33 6 10 17 102
% of all respondents 35% 32% 6% 10% 17%  
% of all those answering 42% 39% 7% 12%    

Figures do not necessarily sum to 100% due to rounding. 

Contact

Email:

Back to top