The unfortunate collapse of a rear wall in one of Glasgow's most prestigious tenement areas last month highlighted the confusion around who is responsible for the maintenance of our world-famous dwellings.

Amid all the finger-pointing, one thing has been overlooked. It is that a factor's job description is property management, which by definition means it is they who are responsible for maintenance. Yet, when the heat is on, they appear to be completely unaccountable.

When someone buys a tenement flat they are often locked into a contract with the existing property management company for that block, and must agree to pay for the privilege. Factors claim that monies levied are for everyday maintenance such as replacing tiles or cleaning gutters. Most people pay up in the naive belief that such regular maintenance will stave off any major repair work.

In too many cases, however, reality does not match expectation.

Basic quarterly bills of at least £60 per flat - say £500 per close - itemise menial maintenance jobs. These bills guarantee the factor a minimum income of £2000 a year per close plus interest. Factors handle hundreds of closes each. Yet, when there are major problems to be seen to, such as dry rot in the roof space, major water ingress owing to cracked flashing around the base of a chimney pot, or a persistently leaky downpipe that's causing green algae to grow over exterior stonework, it's common that nothing will get done for months. By their very nature such problems are the result of long-term neglect, yet factors often wait until it's crisis time, then put all the onus back on the residents.

Rather than act quickly to avoid further damage, factors insist on collecting all money upfront before ordering a job to be done. Quotes for jobs are organised by them - and in my experience they are invariably sky-high. This leads to squabbling among suspicious residents, and more delays as the factor then tenders further quotes. When one resident of the close refuses to pay, the whole thing seizes up, or the other neighbours are made to pay an extra eighth each. Even if all goes well and all eight residents pay up, there is no guarantee the job will go ahead anytime soon. I know of one recent case where a factor banked £16,000 for a major roof repair - that's £2000 from each flat owner - early last summer, and the work has not yet started. The factor has missed the moment: with the recent rain and storm damage the builders are now far too busy doing repairs elsewhere. Meanwhile, the residents, and the fabric of the building, are living with the consequences.

It only takes a cursory look around our precious Victorian heritage - so unique it helped Glasgow become UK City of Architecture in 1999 - to see that the existing system of property maintenance is in chaos. A recent survey indicated that Glasgow alone needs £585m worth of investment over the next 20 years if the city's 24,000 sandstone buildings are to be properly preserved.

A flick through the Yellow Pages illustrates that property management in Glasgow is being handled by a small number of very large companies. This is dangerous because it means that power is in the hands of the few. Individuals are discovering that opting out of the system does not always work: it has become common for builders to refuse to do work on properties that aren't factored. Why is this? Who factors the factors?

It seems to me that it's time to redefine the role of property managers. Scotland should have a property czar to force factors to be more pro-active. A common charter, available online for everybody to see, should be drawn up to spell out what exactly are their responsibilities and to chart their progress. Annual roof, window and pointing inspections should be done with residents present. Prevention should be made as important as cure. Regular check-ups should become standard practice. If dentists can do it with Denplan, then factors can do it with a similar scheme. Thousands already pay into it, and it's time we saw some results.

Only when the mystery surrounding the role of the factor vanishes can we start again on a level playing field. Is Cate's idea workable? E-mail her courtesy of features@theherald.co.uk (with the subject line Think Tank). We'll bring you the best responses later in the week, and a new idea next Monday.