Seòmar agus comataidhean

There will be a division.

For

Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)

Against

Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)

I call myself to speak to amendment 504, in my name, and other amendments in the group. As we have heard from Mark Griffin and Emma Roddick, many committee members will have been asked to help constituents who are experiencing difficulties with property factors. Some property factors provide good services to owners, but many do not.

Since the Property Factors (Scotland) Act 2011 came into force, the number of complaints has grown, starting at 26 and reaching a record high of 338 in 2023. Many owners of factored properties complain that much-needed repairs are not done or that they are delayed, carried out to a poor standard or overcharged for. This really matters to a great many people. Approximately 710,000 Scottish properties—about a quarter of all homes—are managed by almost 400 property factors and letting companies. When owners want to change factors, it can be very difficult to do so, given the high threshold for agreement that is needed. In larger developments that perhaps have many absentee owners, it can be practically impossible, which means that factors lack the incentive to improve and owners are stuck with a poor service.

We do not tolerate that in other markets. If your bank provides a poor service, you can move your account—and the United Kingdom Government has changed the law to make it easier to do that. It used to be much harder to switch energy providers, but energy customers can now switch more easily if they are paying too much or are getting a poor service.

We could do the same with property factors. At the moment, it is very complicated to dismiss or to appoint a factor, and different thresholds for reaching a decision apply to different developments. Amendment 505 would address that by requiring only a majority vote. Previous legislation has already lowered the threshold, so my amendment is not at all unprecedented or experimental.

Amendment 504 would provide for a simple process for requesting that a factor be “removed from the register”. Owners would be able to send a request to the Scottish Government on the basis that their factor is falling short of its obligations, and ministers would be under a duty to consider the request and to either remove or retain the factor, giving reasons for the decision. Information on the number of factors removed or retained and the reasons for that would have to be published. That would improve transparency and strengthen the hand of owners against poor factors.

Advice Direct Scotland supports changes to the factoring system. It has stated:

“The kind of reforms and legislation within the Act of 2011 don’t really hold factors to account as much as they probably should. There’s an urgent need for greater transparency and awareness to ensure homeowners understand their rights and can effectively challenge unfair factoring practices.”

As Mark Griffin mentioned, former MSP Patricia Ferguson, who introduced the bill that became the 2011 act, is supportive of a reset of the relationship between owners and factors. We can discuss the details over the summer and I am happy to make changes to my amendments ahead of stage 3, but it is beyond doubt that the property factoring industry needs to change. Although I appreciate that the Scottish Government might intend to review the situation shortly, it might take years for a review to be established, conducted and reported on and for that to result in changes. Some owners simply cannot wait that long.

I call Mark Griffin to wind up and to press or withdraw amendment 507.

There will be a division.

For

Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)

Against

Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)

The question is, that amendment 462 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The result of the division is: For 1, Against 6, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 463 disagreed to.

Amendment 464 moved—[Maggie Chapman].

The question is, that amendment 464 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The result of the division is: For 1, Against 6, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 464 disagreed to.

Amendment 542 not moved.

Amendment 543 moved—[Maggie Chapman].

There will be a division.

For

Burgess, Ariane (Highlands and Islands) (Green)
Coffey, Willie (Kilmarnock and Irvine Valley) (SNP)
MacGregor, Fulton (Coatbridge and Chryston) (SNP)
Stevenson, Collette (East Kilbride) (SNP)

Against

Gallacher, Meghan (Central Scotland) (Con)
Griffin, Mark (Central Scotland) (Lab)
Stewart, Alexander (Mid Scotland and Fife) (Con)

The question is, that amendment 224 be agreed to. Are we agreed?

Members: No.

The result of the division is: For 2, Against 5, Abstentions 0.

Amendment 224 disagreed to.

Amendment 225 moved—[Rachael Hamilton].