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

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.