Tribunal Cases

The homeowner complained about the lack of valid VAT invoices. The tribunal found the factor had not provided them and proposed a Property Factor Enforcement Order requiring the factor to provide the invoices or alternative documentation.

The homeowner complained that the property factor allowed some residents to personalize communal gardens while rejecting her proposal for benches. The tribunal found the factor had not breached the code of conduct and dismissed the complaint.

The homeowner complained about the property factor's handling of charges and lack of a written statement. The tribunal found the factor had not breached the code of conduct, citing acceptable reasons for delays and system errors.

The homeowner complained, and the tribunal initially issued a Property Factor Enforcement Order (PFEO) ordering the factor to pay compensation. The factor then complied with the order, and the tribunal certified the compliance.

The homeowner's application was rejected because they failed to provide evidence of notifying the property factor about their concerns, as required by the rules. The tribunal found the application was not lodged correctly.

The homeowner's application was rejected because they failed to provide necessary information and evidence of notifying the property factor about their concerns, as required by the rules.

The homeowners complained about the property factor's failure to comply with the Code of Conduct. The tribunal found the factor in breach and ordered them to conduct an audit, pay each homeowner £100, and pay Dr. Anderson an additional £600.

The homeowner complained about the property factor's failure to comply with the Property Factor Code of Conduct. The tribunal found the factor in breach and ordered them to pay £400 compensation for distress and inconvenience. The factor has since complied with the order.

The homeowner complained about the factor's handling of a fire alarm upgrade tender process and the complaints procedure. The tribunal found the factor breached the code of conduct by not handling the complaint appropriately and ignoring the homeowner's concerns, and issued a Property Factor Enforcement Order.

The homeowner complained about the property factor's failure to respond to communications, provide financial information, and follow their complaints procedure. The tribunal found the factor in breach of their duties and ordered them to pay £400 in compensation.

The homeowner complained about the factor's failures to comply with the Code of Conduct and their duties. The tribunal found the factor had failed in multiple areas, including providing information and responding to requests, and proposed a Property Factor Enforcement Order.

The homeowner complained about the property factor's handling of the alarm system upgrade, corridor heating, and other charges. The tribunal found the factor had not breached its duties, correctly interpreted the deed, and dismissed the homeowner's complaints.

The homeowner complained about the property factor's failure to follow proper procedures and provide clear information. The tribunal found the factor failed to comply with the code of conduct regarding management fees, misleading information, and not responding to inquiries. The tribunal ordered the factor to pay £500 compensation.

The homeowner complained about the factor's failures to comply with the Code of Conduct and their duties. The tribunal found the factor had failed in multiple areas, including providing information and responding to requests. The tribunal proposed a Property Factor Enforcement Order.

The homeowner complained about unclear management fees. The tribunal found the factor had addressed the issue and provided compensation, so no further order was needed.

The tribunal dismissed the complaints of three homeowners because they had not properly notified the property factor of their issues before applying to the tribunal. The tribunal will proceed with the complaint of the fourth homeowner who had followed the correct procedure.

The homeowner's application was rejected because they failed to provide requested information. The tribunal found the homeowner did not respond to requests for information and rejected the application.

The homeowner complained about the factor's decision to increase funding to the contingency fund without a vote. The tribunal found the factor was within its rights to make the decision and did not breach its duties.

The tribunal is considering issuing a Property Factor Enforcement Order (PFEO) because the factor may have failed to fulfill their duties. The tribunal is giving the factor and other parties 14 days to make representations.

The homeowner complained about the factor's failures to comply with the Code of Conduct and their duties. The tribunal found the factor had failed in multiple areas, including providing information and responding to requests, and proposed a Property Factor Enforcement Order.

The homeowner complained about the factor's failure to comply with the Property Factor Code of Conduct. The tribunal found the factor had failed to comply and issued a Property Factor Enforcement Order, which the factor subsequently complied with.

The homeowner complained about being charged for lighting work after selling their property. The tribunal found the factor had followed proper procedures and that the homeowner was liable for the costs. No compensation was awarded.

The homeowner complained that the factor failed to inform them of debt recovery problems of other homeowners, leading to an unexpected bill. The tribunal found the factor in breach of the Code and ordered them to pay £100 compensation and refund late payment charges.

The homeowner complained about various issues, including misleading information and failure to maintain the property. The tribunal found the property factor had not breached their duties and dismissed the complaint.

The homeowner complained that the factor failed to inform them of a debt reallocation, resulting in an unexpected bill. The tribunal found the factor in breach of the Code and ordered them to pay £100 and refund late payment charges.

The homeowner complained that the factor failed to inform them about other owners' debt recovery issues, leading to an unexpected bill. The tribunal found the factor in breach of the Code and ordered them to pay £100 and refund late payment charges.

The homeowner complained about the property factor's handling of debt recovery and communication. The tribunal found the factor had not breached its duties or the code of conduct, and no enforcement order was issued.

The homeowner complained about the property factor's failure to comply with the Property Factors Code of Conduct. The tribunal found the factor had failed to comply and issued a Property Factor Enforcement Order, which the factor subsequently complied with.

The homeowner complained about the property factor's failure to comply with the Property Factors Code of Conduct. The tribunal issued a Property Factor Enforcement Order, which the factor subsequently complied with by paying the homeowner £100.

The homeowner complained about the factor's handling of landscape maintenance and debt recovery. The tribunal found the factor had not breached the Property Factor Code of Conduct, but could have communicated better. No compensation was awarded.

The homeowner complained that the factor had not amended their statement of services and had breached the code of conduct. The tribunal found the factor had breached the code of conduct and issued a Property Factor Enforcement Order.

The homeowner's complaint resulted in a Property Factor Enforcement Order. The tribunal determined that the property factor had complied with the order.

The homeowner had a Property Factor Enforcement Order (PFEO) issued against the factor. The tribunal found the factor had not complied with the PFEO and issued a notice of failure to comply.

The homeowner's application was rejected because they failed to provide necessary information and evidence of notifying the property factor about their concerns, as required by the rules.

The homeowner complained about the property factor's handling of general meetings. The tribunal found the factor had not followed the development management scheme and ordered them to comply with it.

The homeowner's application was rejected because they failed to provide necessary information and documentation, as required by the rules and the 2011 Act. The tribunal had requested this information multiple times, but the homeowner did not respond.

The homeowner's application was rejected because they failed to provide necessary information and documentation, as requested by the tribunal, regarding their complaint against the property factor.

The homeowner's application was rejected because they failed to provide necessary information and documentation, including details of their complaint and the property factor's response, as required by the rules.