Ratings & Reviews
Written Statement of Services
Mirrored copy hosted by Compare Factors.
How James Gibb's statement compares: emergency response 24h vs industry median 4.0h; insurance commission: takes commission. See how all 80 statements compare →
- Management Fee
- detailed in Section 07 of your Development Schedule
- Emergency Response
- 24 hours
- Routine Response
- 7 working days
- Enquiry Response
- 5 working days
- Complaint Response
- 10 working days
- Billing Frequency
- detailed in Section 10 of your Development Schedule
- Notice Period
- Section 15 of your Development Schedule
- Delegated Authority
- as detailed in Section 02 of your Development Schedule
- Insurance Commission
- Takes commission (amount not published)
Areas Covered
James Gibb's coverage spans 14 areas of Scotland (from our coverage mapping).
Area
Mapped properties
Market share
Portfolio Profile
2,321
Buildings managed
23.2
Avg units / building
16
Median units / building
Building Size Distribution
Distribution of managed buildings by unit count. Average building size: 23.2 units.
Tribunal Record
Since 2021
104
Cases
61%
Upheld
(median: 50%)
15.3
Adjusted rate/10k
(median: 6.6)
38
PFEOs
Enforcement
£33,573
Paid
Compensation
Communication
Top Issue
64 cases
Rating basis: PFEO-weighted rate 15.3 per 10,000 (10–30). Unweighted adverse rate: 11.7 per 10,000 properties. How we calculate this →
All Complaint Types
Communication (64)
Maintenance (42)
Complaints Handling (33)
Financial (30)
Other (26)
Insurance (13)
Consultation (8)
Debt Recovery (6)
Disclosure (5)
Recent Decisions
FTS/HPC/PF/24/4965
2026-09-10
PFEO Proposed
A homeowner at a Stockbridge, Edinburgh development complained that the respondent failed to repair a leaking gutter above his garage, first reported in November 2022, which remained unresolved until a fellow homeowner effected a permanent repair in October 2025. The Tribunal found breaches of OSP 6 (failure to instruct repair in a timely way after January 2023), OSP 11 (failure to respond to enquiries within reasonable timescales), and s.6.1 of the 2021 Code (failure to make prompt repairs to prevent further damage), and proposed a PFEO requiring payment of £125 compensation. The respondent did not attend the hearing and no breach was found in respect of the initial repair instruction in November 2022 or in relation to s.6.3 or s.6.7 of the Code.
"It should not have taken one of the other homeowner to effect a temporary repair in October 2024 then a full repair in October 2025."
Maintenance
Communication
View on HPC →
FTS/HPC/PF/25/2650 | FTS/HPC/LM/25/3386
2026-09-10
PFEO Proposed
A homeowner applied regarding the property factor's management of development debt, septic tank billing, and complaints handling at a small development in Linlithgow. The Tribunal found no breaches under the 2012 Code and cleared the factor on communication, maintenance, and complaints sections of the 2021 Code, but upheld breaches of sections 4.9 and 4.10 (homeowners were not adequately informed of the scale of accumulating debt and the factor failed to exhaust recovery options before redistributing debt to compliant owners) and OSP 6 (reasonable care and skill, including incorrect charges passed to residents in relation to a neighbouring farmhouse sharing the septic tank). The Tribunal proposed a PFEO requiring the factor to pay £500 compensation, comprising £148.07 for redistributed historical debt and £351.93 for time, trouble and inconvenience.
"homeowners do not appear to have been adequately informed about the scale of the debt, how it had accumulated, and the likelihood that it would ultimately be redistributed amongst compliant owners"
Financial
Debt Recovery
View on HPC →
FTS/HPC/PF/25/1680 | FTS/HPC/PF/25/1681
2026-08-20
Dismissed
A homeowner applied under s.17 of the Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011 raising three complaints about common electricity supply management: alleged back billing in breach of OFGEM rules, whether supply contracts represented value for money, and whether third-party broadband providers were improperly using the common electricity supply. After a hearing, the Tribunal found no breach of property factor duties or the Code on any ground, accepting that the supplies were treated as commercial (placing them outside the OFGEM domestic back-billing prohibition), that the respondent had appropriately engaged energy brokers to procure contracts, and that the third-party electricity usage was minimal and no payments had been received by the respondent.
"The Respondent has not failed to comply with its property factor's duties."
View on HPC →
James Gibb rates 2.5★ — below the Aberdeen & Aberdeenshire average of 3.1★. See better-rated factors covering your building →
Thinking of switching from James Gibb Property Management Ltd? Read our step-by-step guide to changing property factors in Scotland.
Had problems with James Gibb Property Management Ltd? Read our step-by-step guide to making a formal complaint about your property factor.
Company Info
Companies House →
Status
Active
Incorporated
2006-03-23
Company No.
SC299465
Accounts
Up to date
Directors
5
Avg. Tenure
3.3 yrs
FAQ
Has James Gibb had any tribunal cases?
Yes, James Gibb has had 104 tribunal cases since 2021, with 61% of complaints upheld.
How do I make a complaint about James Gibb?
First, raise your complaint directly with James Gibb using their formal complaints procedure (required by law to be in their Written Statement of Services). If the factor refuses or unreasonably delays after you notify them in writing (section 17 of the Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011), you can apply to the Housing & Property Chamber. Visit housingandpropertychamber.scot to start an application. Our complaints guide explains the full process including template letters.
How do I switch away from James Gibb?
To change property factors, you'll need a majority vote from property owners in your development (typically at an AGM or EGM). The new factor must be registered with the Scottish Property Factor Register. Our switching guide explains the full process step-by-step.