Tribunal Record

The Tribunal found Ross & Liddell had breached the Code of Conduct and proposed a Property Factor Enforcement Order that included an apology and payment of £500 to the applicant.

"The Tribunal makes a Proposed Property Factor Enforcement Order in the above Application as follows: - The Respondent is to write to the Applicant take the following action: 1. Apologise for breaching their obligations under Section 6.4 of the relevant Code of Conduct. 2. Make a monetary payment of £500.00 to the Applicant as compensation for her inconvenience."

The tribunal found the factor breached the code and proposed a PFEO, requiring the factor to pay compensation. The factor paid the compensation before the order was made, so the tribunal decided a PFEO was unnecessary.

"On 4 September 2025, following a Case Management Discussion held on 19 August 2025, the Tribunal made a Decision that the property factors had failed to comply with OPSP11 of the Property Factors Code of Conduct effective from 16 August 2021 and intimated that it proposed to make a Property Factor Enforcement Order."

The homeowner alleged the factor failed to comply with the Code of Conduct. The tribunal found the factor had not breached its duties, as the homeowner failed to provide adequate specification of complaints. The application was dismissed.

"In all of the circumstances narrated above, the Tribunal finds that the Factor has not failed in its duty under section 17(1)(b) of the 2011 Act to comply with sections 2.1, 6.1 and 6.9 of the 2012 Code of Conduct, property factor duties during the period 16th November 2017 to 16th August 2021 and sections 2.1 and 6.1 of the 2021 Code of Conduct."

The tribunal found that Ross and Liddell breached the Code of Conduct. The tribunal issued a Property Factor Enforcement Order for compensation and an apology. The factor complied with the order.

"The Tribunal order the Respondent to pay to the Applicant the sum of £150 for his time, effort, and inconvenience, and (2) The Tribunal order the Respondent to issue a letter of apology to the Applicant for their failure to comply with the Code of Conduct."

The tribunal rejected the application because the applicant was not a homeowner under the Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011, and therefore the tribunal did not have jurisdiction.

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

The Tribunal found that the factor had not breached the Code of Conduct regarding emergency repairs. The homeowner's application was dismissed.

"The Respondent has not breached this part of the Code."

The Tribunal found that the Property Factor had failed to carry out their duties and issued a PFEO requiring them to pay the homeowner £200. The factor later complied with the PFEO.

"The Property Factor is required, within 30 days of the making of this Property Factor Enforcement Order, to make payment of the sum of £200.00 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 carry out its property factor duties."

The tribunal found the factor breached the Code by unreasonable delays in progress of repairs, specifically between receiving the tender documents and sending the report and requesting payment from the homeowner.

"The Tribunal find that the Factor took approximately six weeks to send the owners the tender report and request payment. The Tribunal determine that this delay was unreasonable and the services provided were not provided in a timely way."

The Tribunal found that the factor failed to comply with section 2.7 of the Code of Conduct regarding response times, but decided not to issue a Property Factor Enforcement Order.

"Therefore, the Tribunal do not consider it appropriate to issue a Property Factor Enforcement Order."

The Tribunal found the Property Factor breached the Code of Conduct. Initially, a PFEO was proposed, but it was not made as the factor had complied with the terms of the proposed PFEO.

"The Tribunal found both Mr. Rasool and Ms. Johnston to be truthful with no attempt to deceive. However, the Tribunal found Mr. Rasool to have an unrealistic expectation of what to expect from the Property Factor in respect of the service standards offered by their WSS and in terms of the Code."

The tribunal found the factor in breach of the Code of Conduct due to delays and poor communication regarding water ingress. The tribunal proposed a PFEO that included £3000 compensation. The factor complied with the order.

"The Tribunal considers that a substantial level of compensation to reflect this should be imposed on the Respondents and that the sum of £3000.00 is an appropriate amount to award the Applicant."

The tribunal found the factor had breached the Code of Conduct, issued a PFEO for £600 compensation and the factor complied with the order.

"Having determined by Decision dated that the Property Factor had failed to comply with the Section 14 duty in terms of the Act, and having determined to issue a Property Factor Enforcement Order (“PFEO”), the Tribunal gives Notice in accordance with Section 19(2)(a) of the Act that the Tribunal proposes the following PFEO and invites the Parties to make representations no later than 20 January 2025."

The homeowner's application alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct. The tribunal found in favor of the factor and dismissed the application, finding no breaches.

"The Tribunal determines that the Factor has not failed to comply with (i) sections 6.1, 6.2, 6.4, 6.7 and 7.1 of the 2021 Code of Conduct and (ii) Property Factor duties, in relation to the Homeowner’s complaints."

The tribunal rejected the homeowner's application because she failed to provide the necessary information, as requested on multiple occasions. No breach of the Code of Conduct was found.

"Accordingly I have concluded that it would not be appropriate to accept the application at this time and the application must be rejected."

The homeowner's application was rejected due to failure to provide requested information and satisfy application requirements.

"Accordingly I have concluded that it would not be appropriate to accept the application at this time and the application must be rejected."

The tribunal found the property factor breached the Code of Conduct by failing to adequately communicate with the homeowner regarding roof repairs. No financial orders or PFEO were issued.

"Accordingly, the Tribunal found that the Property Factor had failed to comply with strict terms of Section 6.4."

The tribunal rejected the homeowner's application because they failed to provide evidence of prior notification to the property factor, as required by law.

"The Legal Member considers that the application should be rejected in terms of Rule 8(1) (c) of the Rules."

The homeowner was not satisfied with the standard of work carried out. The tribunal reviewed the evidence and found the property factor had not breached the Code of Conduct, dismissing the application.

"From the Tribunal’s Findings in Fact, the Tribunal found that the Property Factor had not failed to comply with relevant parts of the 2021 Code."

The homeowner claimed the factor was charging a full management fee despite not managing all common areas. The tribunal found no breach of duty and dismissed the application.

"The Tribunal determined that the Property Factor has not failed to carry out its property factor duties."

The Tribunal rejected the homeowner's application because the homeowner failed to provide evidence of notifying the property factor about the concerns.

"the application should be rejected in terms of Rule 5 (1) and Rule 8 (1) (c) of the Rules."

The Tribunal rejected the homeowner's application because the homeowner failed to provide required documentation and information.

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

The homeowner alleged the property factor breached the Code of Conduct. The Tribunal reviewed the case and found that the factor had not breached the Code, dismissing the homeowner's application.

"The First-tier Tribunal for Scotland (Housing and Property Chamber) (‘the Tribunal’) determined that it was able to decide the application without a Hearing and decided that the property factors had not failed to comply with the Property Factors Code of Conduct effective from 16 August 2021."

The Tribunal found the Property Factor in breach of the Code of Conduct and proposed a Property Factor Enforcement Order that included a letter of apology and compensation.

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

The tribunal reviewed the homeowner's application concerning alleged breaches of the Code of Conduct. The tribunal found no breaches and dismissed the application.

"The Factor has not failed to comply with its duties under section 14(5) of the 2011 Act."

The homeowner requested all communications between the Property Factor and the Developer, which the Tribunal deemed was too wide in scope. The Tribunal decided the Property Factor had not failed to carry out its duties and dismissed the application.

"The Tribunal found that the Property Factor has not failed to carry out its property factor duties by refusing to provide the requested information to the Homeowner."

The Tribunal rejected the homeowner's application because the homeowner failed to comply with the rules and provide necessary information.

"The application is rejected on that basis."

The Tribunal rejected the applications because the applicant did not provide the necessary information requested to process the applications.

"Accordingly the Tribunal have good reason to believe that it would not be appropriate to accept the applications and reject the applications in terms of rule 8 (1)(c) of the Tribunal Rules."

The tribunal reviewed the homeowner's complaint about roof repairs and determined the property factor had not breached the Code of Conduct, dismissing the application.

"The First-tier Tribunal for Scotland (Housing and Property Chamber) (‘the Tribunal’) decided that the property factors had not failed to comply with Section 6.1 of the Property Factors Code of Conduct effective from 1 October 2012 or Section 6.1 of the Property factors Code of Conduct effective from 16 August 2021."

The tribunal found the property factor in breach of the Code of Conduct and proposed a Property Factor Enforcement Order to provide information and compensate the homeowner for inconvenience and financial loss.

"Therefore, the Tribunal proposes to make a PFEO."

The tribunal rejected the application because the applicant failed to provide requested information, not due to any breach by the property factor.

"Accordingly the Tribunal have good reason to believe that it would not be appropriate to accept the application and reject the application in terms of rule 8 (1)(c) of the Tribunal Rules."

The homeowner's applications alleged breaches of the Property Factor Code of Conduct and failure to comply with duties. The Tribunal determined that the Property Factor had not failed to comply with its obligations.

"The First-tier Tribunal for Scotland (Housing and Property Chamber) determined that the Property Factor: - (i) has not failed to comply with the Section 14 duty in terms of the Act"

The tribunal found the factor in breach of the Code for delaying the provision of financial information. It proposed a Property Factor Enforcement Order.

"We propose to make a property factor enforcement order (“PFEO”). The terms of the proposed PFEO are set out in the attached document."

The homeowner's application was dismissed because they did not properly notify the property factor of their complaints before applying to the tribunal. The tribunal found the homeowner had not followed the correct legal procedure.

"The Tribunal dismissed the Homeowner’s application upon the basis that the Homeowner failed to notify the Property Factor in compliance with Section 17(3) of the Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011 (“the 2011 Act”)."

The tribunal found the factor in breach of the Code of Conduct for various reasons including failure to respond to communications and properly manage cleaning services. It made a PFEO, which was subsequently complied with by the factor.

"The Factor will pay to the Homeowners the sum of Five Hundred and Fifty Pounds (£550) from their own funds in order to compensate the Homeowner for the cleaning services paid for which did not take place, the increased cost of repairs as a result of repairs not being dealt with timeously and the inconvenience caused as a result of the Factor's failure to comply with the Property Factors Code of Conduct."

The Homeowner's application was based on failure to comply with their duties and Section 6 of the Code of Conduct. The Tribunal reviewed the case and found the Factor was in compliance, dismissing the application.

"The Tribunal finds that the Factor did not fail to comply with its Property Factor duties and did not fail to comply with section 6 of the Code of Conduct for Property Factor."

The tribunal found that the factor did not breach the Code of Conduct and dismissed the homeowner's application.

"The Tribunal unanimously determined that the Factor has complied with the Code of Conduct for Property Factors (“the Code”). No Property Factor Enforcement Order (PFEO) is necessary"

The tribunal rejected the application because the applicant failed to provide the necessary information requested.

"The Tribunal rejects the application by the applicant dated 20th January 2021 being an application under section 17(1) of the Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011."

The homeowner's application was rejected because the specific complaints were not notified to the factor beforehand and the Tribunal deemed the application frivolous.

"the Tribunal determined to reject the Application in terms of Section 18(2)(a) of the 2011 Act."