Tribunal Record

The Tribunal found the factor breached the Code of Conduct regarding transparency in financial matters and accounting procedures. The Tribunal proposed a PFEO to rectify the situation.

"The Tribunal made a Proposed Property Factor Enforcement Order, which should be read with this decision."

The homeowner alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct. The tribunal found no breach and dismissed the application.

"The First-tier Tribunal for Scotland Housing and Property Chamber determined that the property factors have not failed to comply with OSP2 and OSP5 of the Property Factors Code of Conduct effective from 16 August 2021 and have not failed to comply with Section 2.8.3 of their Written Statement of Services."

The homeowner alleged breaches of the Property Factor Code of Conduct. The Tribunal found the property factor had not breached the Code and dismissed the application.

"The First-tier Tribunal (Housing and Property Chamber) (“the Tribunal”) determined that the Property Factor has not failed to comply with the 2021 Property Factor Code of Conduct (“the 2021 Code”)"

The tribunal found First Port Property Services Ltd in breach of the Code of Conduct and their duties. They issued a PFEO which the factor subsequently complied with, including paying compensation and a refund.

"The Tribunal order the Respondent to pay to the Applicant one half of the management fee paid by her for the period 1 October 2022 to 1 October 2023, and"

The Tribunal rejected the homeowner's application because he failed to provide necessary information and evidence as requested.

"The Legal Member therefore determines that the application cannot be accepted. The application is rejected on that basis."

The Tribunal rejected the application because the applicant did not provide the required evidence of notification to the property factor and other requested information.

"The application is rejected on that basis."

The Tribunal rejected the homeowner's application because she failed to provide required information, specifically evidence of notifying the property factor about her concerns.

"The Legal Member therefore determines that the application cannot be accepted. The application is rejected on that basis."

The Tribunal found that First Port Property Services had failed to comply with the PFEO, specifically regarding payments to the homeowners and Dr. Anderson.

"The Tribunal hereby determines that the Property Factor Enforcement Order (“PFEO”) dated 9th October 2023 has not been complied with."

The Tribunal found breaches of the Code of Conduct and proposed a PFEO, including an independent audit and compensation to the homeowners.

"The First-tier Tribunal proposes to make the following Property Factor Enforcement Order ("PFEO"):"

The homeowner withdrew their application, but the tribunal issued a PFEO regarding general meetings. The factor then complied with the order.

"The tribunal determined that it must make a PFEO."

The tribunal found the factor in breach of the Code of Conduct. A PFEO was made requiring the factor to pay compensation to the homeowner and the factor complied with the order.

"The Property Factor is required to pay to the Homeowner within 14 days of intimation to them of the PFEO the sum of £400 from their own funds to compensate the Homeowner for the distress, frustration and inconvenience caused as a result of the Property Factor’s failure to comply with the Codes of Conduct for Property Factors."

The tribunal found that the factor breached sections 7.1 and 7.2 of the Code of Conduct. A PFEO was issued, and the factor subsequently complied with the order.

"The Tribunal determined that the Factor has complied in full with the terms of the Property Factor Enforcement Order (“PFEO”) dated 5 October 2022 and therefore no further action on the part of the Factor is required."

The tribunal rejected the homeowner's application because the homeowner failed to provide necessary information and documentation as required by the rules and the 2011 Act.

"The basis of the decision is that the Applicant has failed to comply with Rule 5 and Rule 43 and Section 17 of the 2011 Act."

The Tribunal dismissed the homeowner's application, finding no evidence that the property factor had breached the Code of Conduct or failed in its duties.

"There is no evidence that the property factor has failed to comply with sections 2.5, 3.1, 7.1 and 7.2 of the Code of Conduct for Property Factors (“the Code”) as required by section 14 (5) of the Act."

The Tribunal dismissed the applications of 43 homeowners because they had not followed the property factor's complaints procedure, as required by the Act.

"Applications brought by the other 43 owners ... are dismissed and will not be determined by this Tribunal."

The homeowner's application was dismissed. The tribunal found that the factor had not breached the Code of Conduct or failed in its duties.

"The Tribunal has determined that the Homeowner’s complaints cannot be upheld and that the Factor has not failed to comply with its duties under section 14(5) of the 2011 Act and has not failed to carry out its property factor’s duties."

The Tribunal found the property factor in breach of the Code of Conduct and proposed to make a Property Factor Enforcement Order, giving notice and allowing for representations.

"In terms of section 19(1) (b) of the Act the Tribunal proposes to make a Property Factor Enforcement Order (“PFEO”) and gives notice of that proposal and allow parties to make representations in terms of section 19 (2) of the Act."

The Tribunal rejected the applications due to the lack of required information from the applicants.

"The Tribunal rejects the applications by the Applicants being applications under section 17(1) of the Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011."

The Tribunal rejected the homeowner's application because the homeowner failed to provide the necessary information and documentation, as required by the Rules and the Act.

"The application is rejected on that basis."

The tribunal had proposed a PFEO due to breaches of the Code. The factor then complied with the requirements of the proposed order. Therefore, the tribunal decided not to issue a PFEO.

"Having taken into account the representations from both parties, the Tribunal does not consider a PFEO necessary."

The Tribunal dismissed the applications from three homeowners because they failed to notify the factor of their complaints before lodging their applications, a requirement of the Act.

"Accordingly the Tribunal dismisses the applications against the property factor under references FTS/HPC/PF/20/2156; FTS/HPC/PF/20/2213 and; FTS/HPC/PF/20/2109."