1. Pripremljeno za: Pripremio: Datum: Customer satisfaction poll at land registries of municipal courts and cadastral offices, and public perception Real Property Registration and Cadastre Project PULS 14 December 2006

2. 2 Table of Contents  Introduction and methodology – customer satisfaction  Results of customer satisfaction polls at land registries and cadastral offices  Customer satisfaction at land registries of municipal courts  Customer satisfaction at cadastral offices  Methodology – public perception  Poll results – public perception  land registries  cadastre  real property status  “Organized Land“ Project  Methodology – customer satisfaction – legal entities  Poll results – customer satisfaction – legal entities  land registries of municipal courts  cadastral offices  “Organized Land“ Project

3. 3 Methodology – customer satisfaction  The poll was carried out using the methodology defined in the bidding documents while the implementation plan was proposed by the Puls Agency.  The poll was carried out at all land registries of municipal courts and all cadastral offices and branch offices.  Customers filled in a questionnaire handed out at counters and admission desks in the offices where the poll was being carried out. The staff of the municipal court land registries and cadastral offices were obliged to inform the customers about the poll and offer them the questionnaire.  After filling it in, the customers had to put the questionnaire in a sealed box posted at a visible location near the exit from the land registry/cadastre.

4. 4 Methodology – customer satisfaction  The field research lasted 10 days: 6-17 November.  At certain offices, the polling started on 7 November due to technical reasons and was accomplished there one day later.  At the land registry of the Zagreb Municipal Court, the polling was additionally extended due to a small number of questionnaires (about 100) filled in during the regular polling. Therefore, the polling was extended between 20 and 24 November.  Apart from extending, in this period we began to actively distribute the questionnaires through the Puls Agency associates and land registry staff in order to motivate as many customers as possible to take part in the poll.  In total, the customers’ response was relatively scarce. A total of 11,520 questionnaires was filled in out of 33,000 that were distributed, accounting for about 1/3.  Out of the planned 12,000 questionnaires, 5,289 (ca. 44%) were filled in at the cadastre while ca. 6,231 out of the planned 21,000 (ca. 30%) were filled in at land registries.

5. 5 Methodology – customer satisfaction  At several land registries and cadastral offices, there were difficulties with people disregarding the instructions on how to organize the poll implementation which was mostly rectified by subsequent interventions.  Some of the initial problems when launching the poll were caused by a relatively belated distribution of information within the system.  In order to boost the poll effectiveness in terms of collecting as many questionnaires as possible, additional, previously unscheduled activities were carried out during the polling, both by the Puls Agency and the Client.  Puls organized a field visit to most cadastral offices and land registries after the first few days of the polling in order to check out whether all materials had been placed according to instructions and to inform the staff once again about the need to elicit customers’ participation.  The Client additionally called upon all land registries and cadastral offices in order to further motivate the staff to cooperate.

6. 6 POLL RESULTS

7. 7  Customer satisfaction at land registries of municipal courts  Customer satisfaction at cadastre Poll results – customer satisfaction – natural persons

8. 8 Sample realization – land registries Municipal court at Planned sample Sample obtained % Belom manastiru2005628% Benkovcu504896% Biogradu na moru1002121% Bjelovaru2506426% Blatu501530% Bujama30011940% Buzetu605795% Crikvenici1504933% Čabru501632% Čakovcu3503711% Čazmi704869% Daruvaru1003838% Delnicama5053106% Donjem Lapcu503264% Donjem Miholjcu806986% Donjoj Stubici806480% Drnišu604168% Dubrovniku3004314% Dugom selu1508456% Dvoru500% Đakovu25019678% Đurđevcu1005656% Municipal court at Planned sample Sample obtained % Garešnici70 100% Glini504896% Gospiću803443% Gračacu50612% Grubišnom polju601423% Gvozdu504080% Hrvatskoj Kostajnici502448% Iloku805873% Imotskom504284% Ivancu1005959% Ivanić gradu1003333% Jastrebarskom1503725% Karlovcu400267% Kaštel Lukšiću1505335% Klanjcu50 100% Kninu602237% Koprivnici2507329% Korčuli705579% Korenici501428% Krapini802835% Križevcima1501510% Krku2508936% LRs marked in red had 20% lesser achievement than planned

9. 9 Sample realization – land registries Municipal court at Planned sample Sample obtained % Kutini2009045% Labinu1509261% Ludbregu10044% Makarskoj1503221% Malom Lošinju1004444% Metkoviću504590% Našicama1502315% Novi Vinodolski601728% Novoj gradiški2009447% Novom marofu1003535% Novskoj1005555% Obrovcu502856% Ogulinu1004646% Omišu701521% Opatiji2508333% Orahovici604778% Osijeku65013020% Otočcu1007171% Ozlju504182% Pagu501020% Pakracu1004646% Pazinu1008686% Municipal court at Planned sample Sample obtained % Petrinji1004646% Pitomači601830% Pločama5053106% Poreču30027291% Požegi30012341% Pregradi504998% Prelogu1001515% Puli800537% Rabu801013% Rijeci8009912% Rovinju20017688% Samoboru25024799% Senju501734% Sesvetama2507128% Sinju1001212% Sisku3003110% Slatini1003535% Slavonskom Brodu500306% Slunju504284% Solinu150107% Splitu8509411% Starom gradu1001515% LRs marked in red had 20% lesser achievement than planned

10. 10 Sample realization – land registries Municipal court at Planned sample Sample obtained % Supetru1506040% Svetom Ivanu Zelini1003535% Šibeniku3006722% Tisnom704767% Trogiru15043% Valpovu1503020% Varaždinu4009023% Velikoj gorici3009933% Vinkovcima30012441% Virovitici25011144% Vojniću504182% Vrbovcu1003838% Vrbovskom501224% Vrgorcu504896% Vukovaru20014774% Zaboku1008181% Zadru650112% Zagrebu33202909% Zaprešiću2505723% Zlataru802734% Županji2006432% LRs marked in red had 20% lesser achievement than planned

11. 11 Reasons for visiting a land registry For what purpose/service did you come to the land registry today?

12. 12 Case status What is the status of your case?

13. 13 Duration of procedure How long has the procedure lasted in days or months since its start (if the case has been processed, then since the date of processing)? – Only the respondents, whose case has been or is being processed, answered this question! 43% respondents, whose case has been or is being processed, have not stated the duration of procedure! ¼ respondents stated that the procedure had lasted 1 day.

14. 14 Duration of procedure How long has the procedure lasted in days or months since its start (if the case has been processed, then since the date of processing)? – Only the respondents, whose case has been or is being processed, answered this question! Average = 59 days When the respondents, who have failed to state the duration of proceedings but should have done it because their case has been or is being processed, are omitted from the analysis, we come up with about 2/3 cases being processed within two weeks. However, due to the extremely long duration of certain cases, the average is relatively high!

15. 15 Duration of procedure by case type * Broj ispitanika manji od 50 ** Broj ispitanika manji od 20 Samo ispitanici za koje je poznato trajanje predmeta

16. 16 Duration of proceedings by case type Average number of days for processing a case according to customer comments * No. respondents less than 50 ** No. respondents less than 20 Only the respondents whose case duration is known

17. 17 On behalf of whom is the case handled Do you handle the case for your private purposes, for the legal entity you work for or for a party you represent?

18. 18 Satisfaction with the services rendered in the procedure Please rate your satisfaction with the services rendered in the procedure you are involved in or were involved at this land registry. Very poor 234 Very good Don’t know Average Courtesy of the staff1% 3%7%78%10% 4,77 Accuracy and completeness of the information obtained from the staff 2%1%3%9%72%13% 4,69 Speed of processing a case4%2%6%11%68%9% 4,49 Availability of the information necessary during the procedure 3%2%5%11%65%14% 4,55 Possibility of getting information during the procedure 3%2%4%10%66%15% 4,58 Simplicity of procedure4%3%7%14%60%13% 4,41 Length of waiting in the office4%3%8%15%58%12% 4,36 Overall experience with the land registry processing a case 3%2%5%13%68%9% 4,55

19. 19 Satisfaction with the services rendered in the procedure Please rate your satisfaction with the services rendered in the procedure you have been or were involved at this land registry. The averages were assessed on the basis of the ratio of a specific land registry in the overall number of cases, in order to neutralize the difference in the return of the questionnaires between the land registries!

20. 20 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a land registry Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Ivanec4,984,864,98 4,954,98 5 Vrgorec4,984,964,9854,694,98 5 Garešnica4,964,9554,984,874,934,974,99 Labin4,964,84,994,974,694,874,94,98 Čazma4,87 4,974,954,834,954,914,95 Ozalj4,94,924,974,954,89 4,95 Poreč4,84,644,974,934,864,9 4,91 Beli Manastir4,884,674,884,94,834,844,984,91 Daruvar4,924,714,944,924,744,824,774,91 Novska4,794,694,964,924,64,84,824,91 Bjelovar4,94,584,934,884,744,754,894,9 Donji Miholjac4,94,954,984,944,814,884,914,9 * Only for courts with more than 30 valid questionnaires filled in

21. 21 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a land registry Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Vojnić4,934,9754,95 4,92 4,9 Županja4,834,864,924,934,864,894,834,89 Glina4,794,714,944,894,764,884,854,89 Donja Stubica4,824,584,874,924,424,654,684,88 Slunj4,934,884,944,974,944,874,94,88 Ivanić Grad4,844,894,934,814,794,754,854,87 Nova Gradiška4,844,674,894,954,814,874,914,85 Drniš4,814,764,894,814,89 4,944,85 Jastrebarsko4,884,8454,974,854,974,83 Pazin4,744,514,964,94,694,764,874,83 Korčula4,784,74,914,94,544,854,83

22. 22 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a land registry Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Gvozd4,584,84,854,694,084,594,754,83 Virovitica4,814,834,954,924,864,924,894,81 Metković4,764,784,864,784,684,774,744,8 Samobor4,764,494,944,934,574,764,834,78 Pakrac4,64,73 4,784,624,794,814,78 Rovinj4,774,644,824,814,714,774,834,77 Klanjec4,774,9854,874,774,914,934,77 Slavonski Brod4,854,614,684,814,754,89 4,75 Slatina4,764,614,81 4,594,694,75 Požega4,544,274,77 4,534,614,644,74 Đakovo4,734,614,914,94,684,774,854,74

23. 23 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a land registry Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Đurđevac4,814,864,94 4,764,884,824,74 Mali Lošinj4,474,324,84,774,494,644,594,74 Orahovica4,664,864,824,754,44,724,794,74 Sesvete4,784,594,884,84,54,584,694,72 Ilok4,744,674,944,824,714,774,744,71 Ploče4,674,764,914,744,674,74,694,71 Otočac4,834,774,954,894,644,784,84,7 Novi Marof4,524,614,714,644,464,484,624,7 Kaštel Lukšić4,454,514,934,764,394,654,74,69 Rijeka4,564,284,84,724,384,594,714,68 Ogulin4,664,344,814,664,54,664,624,67

24. 24 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a land registry Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Buzet4,824,814,924,834,714,794,834,64 Kutina4,624,394,874,814,514,594,694,62 Vukovar4,624,244,714,624,494,624,634,6 Varaždin4,584,54,664,694,514,544,554,59 Buje4,663,984,784,684,424,624,584,59 Zabok4,624,614,744,614,414,614,634,58 Sveti Ivan Zelina4,584,354,944,754,344,594,74,56 Petrinja4,564,464,874,514,424,624,614,56 Čakovec4,554,624,744,524,34,264,384,55 Gospić4,654,244,864,764,44,564,754,55 Zlatar4,484,554,884,864,424,524,48

25. 25 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a land registry Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Vrbovec4,324,394,864,684,294,394,384,44 Dubrovnik4,44,224,764,534,094,464,594,41 Tisno4,54,334,754,66 4,54,564,39 Šibenik4,424,514,794,764,474,594,544,37 Vinkovci4,323,794,544,554,054,264,374,36 Krk4,273,794,684,554,044,294,384,34 Osijek4,453,724,694,674,344,364,464,33 Imotski4,144,54,634,453,884,274,434,33 Velika Gorica4,333,824,84,554,194,324,284,3 Opatija4,243,264,624,374,024,154,064,16 Benkovac3,54,064,764,413,894,314,354,11

26. 26 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a land registry Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Pula3,963,384,384,073,913,85 3,98 Delnice3,663,724,464,433,654,064,093,92 Split3,343,244,394,293,53,843,693,77 Zaprešić3,713,474,224,043,773,813,83,71 Zagreb2,172,513,643,22,482,642,732,61 Makarska1,92,563,182,922,182,682,642,28

27. 27 Cost estimate How would you rate the costs incurred during this procedure?

28. 28  Customer satisfaction at land registries of municipal courts  Customer satisfaction at cadastral offices Poll results – customer satisfaction – natural persons

29. 29 Sample realization – cadastral offices Office Planned sample Sample obtained % Bjelovar1002222% Beli Manastir1007373% Benkovac752432% Biograd na moru1003131% Blato752736% Buje755675% Buzet755573% Cres1001818% Crikvenica1007171% Čabar754357% Čakovec1507550% Čazma755067% Daruvar754459% Delnice754763% Donja Stubica753648% Donji Lapac751723% Donji Miholjc1002929% Drniš1001010% Dubrovnik1506141% Duga resa752939% Dugo Selo1009797% Dvor7557% Office Planned sample Sample obtained % Đakovo1009898% Đurđevac1003434% Garešnica751723% Glina754763% Gospić1002020% Gračac750% Grubišno polje753344% Hrvatska Kostajnica751115% Hvar10077% Ilok751013% Imotski753344% Ivanec7579% Ivanić Grad754357% Jastrebarsko1008989% Karlovac1504127% Kaštel Sućurac75110147% Klanjec754459% Knin1003636% Koprivnica1503221% Korčula751925% Korenica752331% Krapina1506342% Offices marked in red had 20% lesser achievement than planned

30. 30 Sample realization – cadastral offices Office Planned sample Sample obtained Office Križevci1003131% Krk1003232% Kutina754256% Labin754155% Lovinac7579% Ludbreg753344% Makarska1001919% Mali Lošinj1001010% Metković1003838% Našice1008888% Nova Gradiška100 100% Novalja75811% Novi Marof751115% Novska751115% Obrovac752128% Ogulin751419% Omiš1006262% Opatija1004646% Orahovica754864% Osijek15011375% Otočac753952% Ozalj751216% Office Planned sample Sample obtained Office Pag7579% Pakrac1003434% Pazin15011677% Petrinja753243% Pitomača753547% Ploče1003030% Poreč1509865% Požega15012583% Pregrada756789% Prelog755472% Pula1503825% Rab1002323% Rijeka2003819% Rovinj1504530% Samobor1009797% Senj1001616% Sinj754661% Sisak1507047% Sl. Brod15014295% Slatina757296% Slunj754864% Solin1002929% Offices marked in red had 20% lesser achievement than planned

31. 31 Sample realization – cadastral offices Office Planned sample Sample obtained Office Split20017688% Stari Grad1001515% Supetar1001414% Sv.Ivan Zelina1002121% Šibenik1502919% Topusko7568% Trogir10066% Valpovo1002828% Varaždin15010067% Vel.Gorica1009999% Vinkovci1004343% Virovitica1504127% Office Planned sample Sample obtained Office Vis753851% Vojnić752533% Vrbovec1005656% Vrbovsko755877% Vrgorac752837% Vukovar1509261% Zabok753749% Zadar15012483% Zagreb1.10022220% Zaprešić1006363% Zlatar757397% Županja1007070% Offices marked in red had 20% lesser achievement than planned

32. 32 Reasons for visiting a cadastral office For what purpose/service did you come to the cadastre today?

33. 33 Case status What is the status of your case?

34. 34 Case processing duration How long do the proceedings last from its start until today in days or months (if the case has been processed then until the date of processing)? – This question was answered only by the respondents whose case has been or is being processed 37% respondents, whose case has been or is being processed, have not stated the case processing duration! 42% respondents stated that the proceedings lasted 1 day.

35. 35 Case processing duration How long has the procedure lasted in days or months since its start (if the case has been processed, then since the date of processing)? – Only the respondents, whose case has been or is being processed, answered this question Average = 15 days When the respondents, who have failed to state the case processing duration because their case has been or is being processed, are excluded from the analysis, we get that about 2/3 cases are processed within a day while an additional 16% are processed within a week.

36. 36 Case processing duration according to case type 48% 45% 17% 15% 44% 24% 39% 8% 13% 18% 19% 11% 16% 6% 1% 2% 8% 2% 6% 1% 3% 24% 26% 4% 17% 3% 4% 14% 11% 4% 11% 4% 36% 32% 19% 20% 35% 26% 46% 1 day Between 2 and 7 days Between 8 and 14 days Between 14 and 30 days More than 30 days No reply Obtain Possessory title Obtain cadastral map extract Request subdivision confirmation Register object with a parcel Request house number assignment Request title holder change Something else

37. 37 Case processing duration according to case type * No. respodents less than 50 ** No. respodents less than 20 Only respodents whose case processing duration is known

38. 38 On behalf of whom is the case brought up? Is the case handled for private purposes, legal entity you work for or do you represent a client?

39. 39 Satisfaction with the services rendered in the procedure Please rate your satisfaction with the services rendered in the procedure you are involved in or were involved at this cadastral office. Very poor 234 Very good Don’t know Average Courtesy of the staff0%1%2%5%82%10% 4,87 Accuracy and completeness of the information obtained from the staff 1% 4%11%75%7% 4,70 Speed of processing a case0%1%2%8%76%13% 4,83 Availability of the information necessary during the procedure 1% 3%10%71%14% 4,73 Possibility of getting information during the procedure 1%2%5%13%67%13% 4,63 Simplicity of procedure1% 3%9%71%15% 4,76 Length of waiting in the office2% 5%13%65%13% 4,59 Overall experience with the land registry processing a case 1% 3%10%75%11% 4,77

40. 40 Satisfaction with the services rendered in the procedure Please rate your satisfaction with the services rendered in the procedure you are involved in or were involved at this cadastral office? The averages were assessed on the basis of the ratio of a specific office in the overall number of cases, in order to neutralize the difference in the return of the questionnaires between the offices!

41. 41 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a cadastral office Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Grubišno polje4,854,8854,854,824,914,975 Klanjec4,914,9354,984,864,9555 Vrgorac54,9254,96 4,844,965 Slatina4,9954,9854,97 4,985 Delnice4,844,98 54,884,934,98 Đurđevac4,944,8854,914,884,974,914,97 Imotski4,974,93554,834,93 4,97 Ivanić Grad54,915 4,944,97 Dugo Selo4,914,954,98 4,864,94,96 Virovitica4,984,884,934,984,854,934,95 Vinkovci4,934,955 4,854,954,974,95 Prelog4,924,98 4,924,754,924,864,94 * Only cadastral offices with more than 30 correctly filled-in questionnaires

42. 42 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a cadastral office Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Pregrada4,874,914,974,944,834,924,94 Knin4,914,574,974,944,634,864,934,94 Benkovac4,934,824,964,994,874,944,974,94 Donja Stubica4,754,744,87 4,74,934,94,93 Pitomača4,884,94,914,944,84 4,974,93 Crikvenica4,83 4,984,924,744,884,894,92 Slunj4,824,884,914,934,744,794,954,91 Pakrac4,974,944,974,914,884,944,884,91 Vrbovsko4,894,924,984,964,624,844,884,9 Sl. Brod4,894,684,95 4,784,94,864,9 Vukovar4,954,854,984,974,774,974,924,9 Buzet4,744,694,914,94,654,814,914,89

43. 43 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a cadastral office Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Rovinj4,584,644,954,884,64,764,834,89 Daruvar4,774,954,934,914,724,91 4,88 Čazma4,84 4,894,914,784,894,844,87 Otočac4,874,824,974,894,824,894,844,87 Omiš4,914,544,974,864,524,954,974,87 Jastrebarsko4,894,9 4,924,784,894,884,87 Našice4,834,864,94,914,674,854,844,85 Ludbreg4,88 4,9754,724,884,914,85 Zabok4,844,934,944,844,484,794,774,84 Vrbovec4,884,834,88 4,84,884,864,84 Zlatar4,764,784,94,784,44,854,84,83 Labin4,824,914,974,914,614,824,894,83

44. 44 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a cadastral office Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Varaždin4,724,814,95 4,664,764,894,83 Požega4,824,784,94,864,784,8 4,82 Orahovica4,84,864,94,884,714,814,94,82 Koprivnica4,944,8154,914,724,774,844,81 Županja4,774,654,824,894,694,794,724,81 Čabar4,724,984,954,854,64,84,934,8 Karlovac4,664,644,924,864,684,674,754,78 Petrinja4,684,624,934,964,674,654,884,77 Vel.Gorica4,424,754,944,844,654,754,794,77 Vis4,744,814,934,834,644,94,794,76 Metković4,734,694,814,834,674,77 4,75 Zadar4,64,254,83 4,544,694,734,75

45. 45 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a cadastral office Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Sinj4,834,754,974,874,934,844,834,74 Zaprešić4,64,584,884,854,684,694,74 Nova Gradiška4,714,414,874,794,424,744,654,73 Sisak4,44,54,954,884,584,664,734,72 Krapina4,674,84,844,814,54,724,74,71 Kutina4,374,724,894,694,364,554,524,71 Osijek4,64,514,894,844,534,654,734,69 Đakovo4,664,64,84,724,474,644,664,69 Kaštel Sućurac4,594,644,8 4,424,614,694,67 Glina4,754,654,824,874,654,744,794,66 Buje4,684,434,794,74,524,644,614,63 Samobor4,224,554,864,754,284,514,694,63

46. 46 Satisfaction with services rendered in the procedure at a cadastral office Processing speed Waiting period Staff courtesy Accuracy of information Simple proceedings Availability of information Possibility of obtaining information Overall experience Bjelovar4,554,484,774,674,384,694,684,61 Čakovec4,514,324,724,654,34,584,554,59 Split4,594,224,784,744,424,584,564,59 Opatija4,433,874,794,764,124,34,314,56 Poreč4,414,344,834,63,964,514,53 Pazin4,414,034,574,644,44,454,494,51 Dubrovnik4,394,134,694,444,134,214,474,49 Zagreb4,143,994,474,484,054,254,294,38 Pula4,033,424,34,324,184,294,164,21 Rijeka3,863,444,134,073,683,743,673,9

47. 47 Cost estimate How would you estimate the costs incurred during this procedure?

48. 48 Conclusion– customer satisfaction  The research results have shown surprisingly positive results of the customer satisfaction poll related to various aspects of the work of land registries at municipal courts and cadastral offices and branch offices.  The results showed that on average it takes a long time to process certain cases, especially at land registries.  However, a rather high average of waiting is not the result of a long waiting period in all cases but an extremely long waiting period for certain types of cases and for disputed cases, along with a relatively acceptable length of waiting for the majority of simple cases.  The majority of land registry customers come there to obtain a title deed while the majority of cadastre customers come there to obtain an extract of cadastral map or possessory title.  As for the cost estimate, the majority of land registry and cadastre customers consider them appropriate.

49. 49 Conclusion– customer satisfaction  Since this research was conceived as a pilot project, the conclusions concerning the research methodology are also valuable.  Important methodological findings:  The readiness of customers to participate in the poll is relatively small so a more proactive approach in recruiting is needed if a larger number of them needs to be engaged.  Older respondents, who appear to account for a significant number of LR and cadastre customers, have difficulties in filling in the questionnaire conceived in this way.  The success of this type of research depends to a large extent on the attitude and effort of the staff which leads to various outputs in different municipal courts/cadastral offices and branch offices.  This type of polling leaves an option of filling in the questionnaire independently from the staff which may put the validity of polling in question.  Filling in the questionnaire independently leads to a relatively large number of errors in the questionnaire.  Therefore, this research should be carried out in the future using a more proactive approach, or rather to use the survey method face-to-face which means that the polling personnel recruits the respondents (unbiased selection) and fill in the questionnaire (less errors when filling in)

50. 50  Land registries  Cadastre  Real properties status  “Organized Land” Project Poll results – public perception

51. 51 Methodology – public perception  The research was carried out by phone interview between 19 and 20 November 2006.  The questionnaire used in the previous poll carried out in the early 2006 was applied with minor changes and corrections.  The research was taken from a stratified (by region and settlement size), random and representative sample of 800 RoC citizens older than 18.  Any significant deviation of the sample from the population structure given the gender, age and education, have been subsequently cancelled through the post-stratification procedure.

52. 52 Sample demographic structure N% Gender Male 37947% Female 42153% Age Up to 30 9612% 31 to 44 yrs 17822% 45 to 60 yrs 27234% Over 60 yrs 25532% Education Elementary school 26133% High school 43855% Higher education/university 10113% Type of settlement Town 45757% Village 34343% Region Zagreb and its environs 19925% Northern Croatia 14318% Slavonia 14018% Lika and Banovina 709% Croatian Primorje and Istria 9512% Dalmatia 15319%

53. 53  General part – knowing of cadastral and LR operations  Land registries  Cadastre  Real properties status  “Organized Land” Project Poll results – public perception

54. 54 Knowledge of land registry functions Do you know the purpose of the land registry and what are its functions?

55. 55 Knowledge of land registry document types Do you know which documents are obtained at the land registry?

56. 56 Land registry work ratings What is your opinion about the work/functioning of the land registry? Average = 3.2

57. 57 Using the services of the land registry Have you in the past five years personally used the services of the land registry or rather land registry departments of the courts?

58. 58 Ways of processing a case Have you used the services of a lawyer, public notary, real estate agency or have you handled yourself the case which prompted you to visit last the land registry? * Only the respondents who have used the land registry services, N=368

59. 59 Land registry staff’s attitude and work rating How satisfied are you with the land registry staff’s attitude and work with regards to the case? Average = 3.7 * Only respondents handling the case themselves, N=181

60. 60 Perception of the simplicity of the procedure Can you assess the extent to which the procedure was, in your opinion, simple or complicated? * Only respondents handling the case themselves, N=181

61. 61 Case processing speed rating Can you estimate your satisfaction with the speed of processing the case? Average = 3.2 * Only the respondents who have used the land registry services, N=368

62. 62 Cost perception Do you consider the cost incurred in the case... ? * Only the respondents who have used the land registry services, N=368

63. 63 Land registry experience rating How would you rate your experience with the land registry for the case? Average = 3.3 * Only the respondents who have used the land registry services, N=368

64. 64 Poll results – public perception  LR department – Land registries  Cadastre  Real properties status  “Organized Land” Project

65. 65 Knowledge of cadastre functions Do you know the purpose of the cadastre and what are its functions?

66. 66 Knowledge about cadastral document types And the ones obtained in the cadastre?

67. 67 Cadastre work rating What is your opinion about the work/functioning of the cadastre? Average = 3.4

68. 68 Using cadastral services Have you in the past five years used the services of the cadastre?

69. 69 Mode of case processing Have you used the services of licensed surveying companies (surveyors) or have you handled the case yourself that made you to visit last the cadastre? * Only the respondents who have used the cadastral services, N=288

70. 70 Licensed surveying company work satisfaction rating How satisfied are you with the licensed surveying company (surveyors) work with the case? Average = 3.7 * Only the respondents who have used the licensed surveying company services, N=103

71. 71 Cadastral staff’s attitude and work rating How satisfied are you with the cadastral staff’s attitude and work with regards to the case? Average = 3.9 * Only respondents handling the case independently, N=183

72. 72 Obtaining instructions and information Have you obtained all requested instructions and information? * Only respondents handling the case independently, N=181

73. 73 Case processing speed rating Can you rate your satisfaction with the case processing speed? Average = 3.5 * Only respondents using cadastral services, N=288

74. 74 Cost perception Do you consider the costs incurred in the case... ? * Only respondents using cadastral services, N=288

75. 75 Rating experience with the cadastre How would you rate your experience with the cadastre in this matter? Average = 3.6 * Only respondents using cadastral services N=288

76. 76 Poll results – public perception  LR department – Land registries  Cadastre  Real property status  “Organized Land” Project

77. 77 Benefit perception for CITIZENS from real property registration In your opinion, what are the benefits for the citizens from the real property registration?

78. 78 Benefit perception for the STATE from real property registration In your opinion, what are the benefits for the state from the citizens registering their property?

79. 79 Real property title Are you personally the owner of the real property, i.e. flat, house, weekend cottage, business premises or land?

80. 80 Real property registration Is your real property registered in the land registers? * Only respondents owning a real property, N=532

81. 81 Reasons for registration What is the main reason that prompted you to register property? * Only respondents whose real property is registered, N=476

82. 82 Reasons why the real property is not registered What is the mean reason you did not register the property? * Only respondents whose real property is not registered, N=45 Not processed They haven’t requested construction permit during construction Problems with the city It has been paid, but not registered They have failed to because they wait for the reform of the system

83. 83 Obstacles for processing citizens’ applications Can you tell us what are, in your opinion, the biggest obstacles for processing citizens’ applications regarding the real property? * Only respondents owning a real property, N=532

84. 84 Poll results – public perception  LR department – Land registries  Cadastre  Real property status  “Organized land” project

85. 85 Project awareness Can you assess the level of your awareness of the Real Property Registration and Cadastre Project that is currently underway?

86. 86 Awareness of who is running the project Do you know who is running the restructuring of the system? * Only respondents familiar with the project, N=551

87. 87 Advertising visibility Have you noticed on TV or in the media the advertising about the real property registration and cadastre reform entitled “Organized Land “?

88. 88 Noticed elements Which elements of that advertisement can you remember? * Only respondents who have noticed the clip, N=359

89. 89 Advertising main message In your opinion, what is the main message of this advertising? * Only respondents who noticed clips and their important components, N=286 That everyone should check the status of the land registry and cadastre records 19% That the land registration reform is underway13% Something else7% Put books/papers in order6% Better/better work in general6% Faster operation/faster processes5% Getting the titles registered3% Updating/backlog clearing3% That dust needs to be wiped2% Citizen cooperation in the land registration and cadastre reform2% General registration2% Computerization2% Cleaning/clean papers2% Registration upon European standards1% Simpler/more accessible1% An attempt to motivate the citizens to cooperate6% Don’t know20%

90. 90 Intent to check the real property status Do you intend to soon visit the land registries/cadastre and check the status of the real property owned by you? * Only respondents owning the property

91. 91 Conclusion – public perception  The respondents are relatively well acquainted with the land registry and cadastre function, although there is a smaller number of respondents who are not aware of these institutions.  The overall rating of the land registry and cadastre work is relatively high because the rating average exceeds 3.  However, this rating is somewhat lower among the respondents belonging to the overall population than among the respondents participating in the poll at the land registries and cadastral office.  As the main benefits of the real property registration for the owners, legal security and possibility of real property availability is perceived while the benefits for the State is perceived primarily in the sense of tax revenues and remunerations and not in the general legal security and creating preconditions for unimpeded real property transactions, and thus the development.  About 30% citizens have never heard of the Real Property Registration and Cadastre Project while about one half has just heard about the project and about 15% feels well-informed about the project.

92. 92 Conclusion – public perception  Cca. 60% of citizens has noticed the media campaign “Organized Land”, while the majority of them spontaneously remembered the campaign itself (ca. 60% of those who noticed).  The campaign visibility is higher among the highly educated, respondents from the cities and respondents with higher income.  Characteristic campaign elements that have been particularly visible are Oliver Mlakar, the message about real property registration and the message about dusting the land registers.  The majority, ca. 80%, of those who have noticed the campaign recognize more or less the main campaign message.

93. 93  Cadastral offices  Land registries at municipal court  “Organized land” project Poll results – Customer satisfaction – legal entities

94. 94 Methodology – regular customer satisfaction  The poll was conducted among 101 legal entity in total.  The sample included 27 developers; 25 licensed surveyors; 20 public notaries, 19 lawyers and 10 banks.  The developers are defined as legal entities who built at least one real property for the market in the past year. The companies recruited are registered for “Development of entire objects” and “Building new real property”. The biggest companies meeting the above-mentioned criteria have been recruited.  The licensed surveyors chosen had to meet the criteria of being the biggest in their county. In principle, two biggest from each county.  The public notaries and lawyers were selected at random with smaller corrections given their main field of activity.  The biggest banks were selected, taking into account the bank representation having the seat in different cities.

95. 95 Methodology – regular customer satisfaction  The poll was carried out using the face-to-face interviewing method.  The poll was carried out between 10 November and 8 December.  The majority of respondents were from Zagreb, cca. ¼ sample.

96. 96 Basic data on the regular customer sample Type of legal entity Number of employees

97. 97  Cadastral office  LR departments of Municipal courts  “Organized Land” Project Poll results – Customer satisfaction – Legal entities

98. 98 Frequency of use of cadastral services Please tell me how often on the average does your legal entity/association use each of the following services at cadastral offices? Several times a week Once a week Once in two weeks Once in three weeks Once a month Once in two months Once in three months 1-2 times in six months Once a year Less frequent or never Don’t know Obtaining possessory title29%17%13%7%15%3% 1% 12% Obtaining a cadastral map excerpt24%13%10%6%13%6%5%3% 18% Request for review and confirmation of geodetic records of change 16%6% 8%7%5% 6%5%35%2% Registration of object with the plot12%10%6%5%4%6%3%9%13%33% Request for registering change of real property contour 5%6%10%1%8%4%5%8% 43%3% Request for registration of title holder over the real property 4%6%5%2%9%4%7% 5%50%2% Request for title holder change4% 1%5%8%4%7%10%7%50%1% Request for registering change of real property area 4% 6%4%9%4%8%6%4%48%4% Request for registering change of land use 4% 3%4%9%4% 7%9%50%3% Request for obtaining house number1%3%2%1%2%3%6%2%11%64%5%

99. 99 Cadastral services use – according to the type of legal entity 80% 65% 43% 37% 9% 22% 30% 27% 24% 26% 50% 40% 0% 84% 76% 32% 8% 0% 12% 16% 8% 16% 100% 96% 93% 33% 37% 74% 63% 41% 55% 15% 5% 10% 0% 10% 5% 0% 15% 89% 68% 42% 0% 37% 26% 16% 42% Entire sample Bank Developpers Licensed surveying company Public notary Lawyer Obtain possessory title Obtain cadastral map extract Request review of cadastral records of change Register object with the plot Request house Number assignment Request title holder change Request change of real property contour Request change of real property area Request change of land use Request title Holder registration Percentage of respondents using this service at least once in a month!

100. 100 Evaluation of experiences with individual services Please evaluate your experiences with each of the services that your legal entity uses more frequently. Bad experien ce 234 Good experien ce Don’t know Average Obtaining a possessory title2% 18%23%53%1%4.24 Obtaining a cadastral map excerpt1%3%24%28%44%1%4.11 Request for house number assignment 5% 20%25%30%15%3.82 Request for registering real property title holder 5%2%25%45%23% 3.8 Request to change real property usage 3% 33% 23%5%3.76 Request to change real property title holder 5%9%23%30% 2%3.74 Request to change the real property surface area 4%7%27%38%24% 3.71 Registering objects on a parcel2%7%31%36%20%4%3.68 Request for reviewing and confirming geodetic reports 3%10%25%36%22%3%3.65 Request for changing the real property shape 4%6%32%36%21% 3.64 * Only for services used more than once a year

101. 101 Evaluation of experiences with individual services – according to legal entities Whole sample Banks Construction investors Certified Geodetic companies Public notaries Lawyers Obtain possessory title Obtain cadastral map extract Request subdivision report review Register object on a parcel Request house number assignment Request change of t title holder Request change of real property shape Request change of real property area Request change of land use Request title holder registration 4.24 4.11 3.65 3.68 3.82 3.74 3.64 3.71 3.76 3.80 4.33 4.29 4.04 3.92 3.473.50 4.14 3.33 3.40 3.50 3.70 3.27 4.19 4.04 3.67 3.733.753.733.75 3.84 3.89 3.85 4.45 4.444.41 3.45 3.80 3.91 3.73 3.60 3.50 4.00 * Only for services used more than once a year, and services used by at least 8 respondents.

102. 102 Reasons for bad experiences Why do you have bad experiences with…? Request for house number assignment (N=2) Too slow Unprofessional Request for changing the title holder (user) (N=6) Too slow Slow in solving queries Slow administrative procedure. Not sure this is justifiable Unprofessional Request for changing real property shape (N=5) Slow, lot of formalities Too slow Unprofessional Request for changing real property surface area (N=5) Regulations not defined enough Too slow Slow administrative procedure. Not sure this is justifiable. A lot of paperwork Unprofessional Request for changing real property usage (N=2) Same as before Too slow Unprofessional Request for registering the title holder (N=3) Slow procedure Unprofessional Obtaining a possessory title (N=4) Very crowded The procedure takes too long Too slow Too much time wasted Unprofessional Obtaining cadastral map excerpts (N=3) Very crowded The procedure takes too long Too slow Unprofessional Request for reviewing and confirming geodetic reports (N=8) Slow (at work) Different criteria upon review Review frequently consists of looking for mistakes Too long in solving the paperwork Solving the paperwork is too complicated The length of the implementation of subdivision and other reports Registering objects on a parcel (N=5) Goes through their technical then legal service Based on the documents they issued and have, they don’t carry out change of possession Different criteria upon review Unnecessarily slow Unprofessional * Only respondents who are not satisfied with the services provided (mark 1 or 2)

103. 103 Evaluation of the different aspects of cadastral operations Please evaluate the different aspects of the functioning of cadastral offices and regional offices. 4.03 3.86 3.77 3.54 3.42 Average 3.36 3.07 2.93

104. 104 Overall mark of cadastral operations On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means «very poor» and 5 «very good», how would you rate cadastral operations in RoC as a whole, considering the role that the cadastre should play? Average = 3.4

105. 105 Average mark of cadastral operations According to the type of legal entity Because of a small number of respondents, the differences only serve as Illustration!

106. 106 Improvement priorities What would you emphasize as the three most important priorities for improving the work of the cadastre? OTHER ANSWERS WITH LESS THAN 4%: Better organization of office hours Shorter queues Better equipped technically Harmonization of data with other services possibilities of completing work through the Internet Manipulative expenses Staff salary raise Staff availability More funds Establishing new cadastral offices

107. 107 Impact of cadastral operations on business activities How does the existing functioning of the cadastre influence your business activities? Average = 3.2

108. 108 Progress of the cadastre Have you recently noticed progress in cadastral operations?

109. 109 Segments with perceived progress In which segments of cadastral operations have you noticed progress? * Only respondents who perceived progress in cadastral operations, N=69

110. 110 Experience with one or several offices Are your experiences connected primarily to one regional office or fore several regional offices?

111. 111 Above-average positive/negative experiences Can you list those regional offices for which you could say that you have above-average positive/negative experiences? PositiveNegative N%N% PUK Bjelovar24%12% PUK Čakovec48% PUK Dubrovnik48% PUK Gospić36%24% PUK Karlovac48%24% PUK Koprivnica714% PUK Krapina510% PUK Osijek24%12% PUK Pazin24%12% PUK Požega24% PUK Rijeka48%36% PUK Sisak24%12% PUK Slavonski Brod24% PUK Split36%24% PUK Šibenik24%12% PUK Varaždin612% PUK Virovitica12% PUK Vukovar24% PUK Zadar24%2 PUK Zagreb918%48% GU Grad Zagreb816%8 No reply816%2857% *Only those respondents that have experience with several cadastral offices, N=49

112. 112  Cadastral offices  Municipal court land registries  “Organized Land” Project Poll results – customer satisfaction – legal entities

113. 113 Usage of LR department services Could you please state how often your legal entity in average uses each of the following services in the land registry? Several times a week Once a week Once in two weeks Once in three weeks Once a month Once in two months Once in three months 1-2 times in six months Once a year Less often or never Don’t know title deed obtaining40%18%11%4%17%2%3%1% 4%1% Change of title registration25%6%7%5%15%5%4%6%1%26%1% Mortgage registration21%9%5%1%9%7%5% 3%35%1% Subdivision registration9%13%6%2%9%8%7% 10%28%2% Building registration10%12%3%6%5%4%7%10%11%32%1% Fiduciary title registration11%8%2%3%7%5%6%7%6%43%3% Mortgage deletion11%7%3%5%10%4%3%6%10%41%1% Splitting registration or co-ownership annulment 3%6%1%5%9%10%8%5%9%44%1% Legal suit registration, guardianship2%6%3%2%8%6%1%12%5%53%2% Purge of life-long usufruct3%4%5%2%5% 7%3%2%61%3% Change of address3% 4%1%4%1%3%6%11%61%3% Condominium ownership registration3%2%3%4%7%9%4%10%16%39%4%

114. 114 Bank Constructing investors Surveying firm Notary public Attorney title deed obtaining Change of title registration Mortgage registrationFiduciary title registration Subdivision registration Splitting registration Building registration Condominium ownership registration Legal suit registration Mortgage registration Purge of life-long usufruct Change of address Total 89% 57% 45% 31% 39% 24% 36% 19% 21% 36% 19% 15% 90% 30% 90% 70% 10% 0% 10% 0% 80% 30% 0% 84% 48% 40% 16% 12% 8% 4% 16% 12% 0% 93% 22% 11% 81% 33% 85% 26% 4% 7% 19% 85% 90% 70% 55% 20% 15% 40% 55% 30% 95% 100% 47% 32% 42% 37% 58% 26% 21% Usage – towards legal entities Percentage of respondents stating that they use the service at least once in one month!

115. 115 Evaluation of experience with individual service Could you please now evaluate your experience with performance of each service used most frequently by your entity. Bad experience 234 Good experience Don’t know Average Change of address 4%28%36%32% 3.96 Legal suit registration, guardianship 10%18%33%28%13%3.89 Mortgage registration2%13%18%32%31%5%3.81 Fiduciary title registration 12%27%22%33%6%3.8 Purge of mortgage2%8%24%31%29%6%3.8 title deed obtaining9%11%18%29%30%2%3.61 Purge of life-long usufruct3%15%32%24% 3%3.52 Change of title registration8%18%22%27%21%4%3.36 Subdivision registration3%23%30%18%23%3%3.36 Splitting registration or co-ownership annulment 2%21%34%13%23%6%3.36 Building registration7%19%28%18%23%5%3.31 Condominium ownership registration12%14%38%12%19%5%3.13 * Samo za usluge koji se koriste češće od jednom godišnje

116. 116 Bank Constructing investors Surveying firm Notary public Attorney title deed obtaining Change of title registration Mortgage registrationFiduciary title registration Subdivision registration Splitting registration Building registration Condominium ownership registration Legal suit registration Purge of mortgage Purge of long-life usufruct Change of address Total Evaluation of experience with individual services – for legal entities 3.61 3.36 3.81 3.80 3.36 3.31 3.13 3.89 3.80 3.52 3.96 3.20 3.78 3.67 3.63 3.38 2.86 3.44 3.38 2.69 2.33 2.60 2.55 3.50 3.693.67 3.883.863.88 3.56 4.35 4.334.31 4.23 3.67 4.00 3.86 4.44 4.17 4.14 4.25 3.29 3.22 3.77 2.80 2.82 3.22 3.67 3.75 3.31 3.38

117. 117 Reasons for bad experience Why do you have bad experience with …? title deed obtaining (N=20) Due to slowness of procedure Due to long queues, you sign up in the morning, they start to work at 8 a.m. and you wait until noon, people enter out of order A lot of time Informatization Long queues Too slow Service is too slow When issuing the owner’s extract, the issued extract doesn’t have the date when it was issued, but shows the state one day ago Slow, there are no data etc. Employees are unready to help Due to unregistered land books Slowness, if more copies are needed, we do not obtain them all and they do not say why One should enable the party to obtain the data in a different, simpler and faster way It takes a lot of time It is hard to obtain the data Extracts from the Internet are not valid as the official ones Change of title registration (N=19) Capability of registration procedure A lot of time and long procedure, it lasts long Long queues Additional papers are always needed A lot of formality, LR clerks are unkind Cases are slowly processed Due to long processing Employees are unready to help One should enable the party to obtain the data in a different, simpler and faster way There is no communication between the LR clerks and the client Different practices It is hard to obtain the data Inaccurate information on the status of service Non-transparency of the party’s LR clerk Uneven practices Data from the Internet are not valid as the official ones Self-will of LR clerks Lack of communication with clients * Only the respondents that evaluated the services with 1 or 2

118. 118 Reasons for bad experience Why do you have bad experience with …? Mortgage registration (N=9) Due to slowness of procedure Long queues Too slow Due to long processing Due to insufficient knowledge of regulations Employees are unwilling to help It takes a lot of time It is hard to obtain the data Uneven practices Data from the Internet are not valid as the official ones Self-will of LR clerks Lack of communication with clients Fiduciary title registration (N=6) Too slow Employees are unwilling to help Long queues Inaccurate information on the status of service It takes a lot of time Different practices It is hard to obtain the data Data from the Internet are not valid as the official ones Self-will of LR clerks Subdivision registration (N=16) Unharmonized data Long legal procedure, it takes a lot of time A lot of formalities, LR clerks are unkind When a document is missing in the case, the application is refused Too slow Refusal without correcting Slow Much too slow Because it takes a lot of time Employees are unwilling to help One should enable the party to obtain the data in a different, simpler and faster way Legal suit registration, guardianship (N=4) Too slow Employees are unwilling to help Different practices Different interpretation of laws and other regulations among individual LR clerks and judges, which causes making of different decisions for the same type of case Uneven practices Application is immediately refused without notifying the party first and give the possibility to correct it Self-will of LR clerks Lack of communication with clients * Only the respondents that evaluated the services with 1 or 2

119. 119 Reasons for bad experience Why do you have bad experience with …? Splitting registration or co-ownership annulment (N=11) The same as before A lot of administrative problems, a lot of necessary papers Registered under a new number Too slow Refusal without possibility to correct Slow Each a bit less typical case can hardly be finished Lack of knowledge on the basic institutes of LR law Employees are unwilling to help One should enable the party to obtain the data in a different, simpler and faster way It takes a lot of time Different practices Different interpretation of laws and other regulations among individual LR clerks and judges Lack of professionalism Uneven practices Application is immediately refused without notifying the party first and give the possibility to correct it Lack of motivation Self-will of LR clerks Lack of communication with clients Building registration (N=15) Unharmonized data Due to long queues, you sign up in the morning, they start to work at 8 a.m. and you wait until noon, people enter out of order Long procedure A lot of formalities, LR clerks are unkind Registered under a new number Refusal without possibility to correct Slow processing Too slow Too much unnecessary documentation is needed due too lack of connection between the departments Due to long processing Employees are unwilling to help One should enable the party to obtain the data in a different, simpler and faster way Different practices Different interpretation of laws and other regulations among individual LR clerks and judges Uneven practices Application is immediately refused without notifying the party first and give the possibility to correct it Self-will of LR clerks Lack of communication with clients * Only the respondents that evaluated the services with 1 or 2

120. 120 Reasons for bad experience Why do you have bad experience with …? Condominium ownership registration (N=11) Long queues Procedure takes a lot of time A lot of formalities Registered under a new number Because the procedure takes a lot of time Too slow Refusal without possibility to correct Slow processing Employees are unwilling to help Due to bad organization of work One should enable the party to obtain the data in a different, simpler and faster way Lack of professionalism and interest in employees Employees are unkind Different practices Different interpretation of laws and other regulations among individual LR clerks and judges, which causes making of different decisions for the same type of cases Uneven practices Application is immediately refused without notifying the party first and give the possibility to correct it Self-will of LR clerks Lack of communication with clients Purge of mortgage (N=5) Banks and my firm are not the same Procedure takes a lot of time Too slow Now it is OK Employees are unwilling to help Long queues Different practices Uneven practices Self-will of LR clerks Lack of communication with clients Purge of life- long usufruct (N=6) Too slow Cases are handled very slow Employees are unwilling to help Long queues Different practices Different interpretation of laws and other regulations among individual LR clerks and judges Uneven practices Application is immediately refused without notifying the party first and give the possibility to correct it Self-will of LR clerks Lack of communication with clients Change of address (N=1) Employees are unwilling to help * Only the respondents that evaluated the services with 1 or 2

121. 121 Evaluation of various aspects of land registry operations Could you please now evaluate various aspects of the work of LR departments and branch offices 3.62 3.55 3.45 3.3 3.15 Prosjek 3.13 3.08 2.67

122. 122 Evaluation of land registry operations as a whole On a scale from 1 to 5, where 1 means “very bad” and 5 means “very good”, how would you rate the land registry operations in the Republic of Croatia as a whole, concerning the role that the land registry should play? Average = 2.99

123. 123 Evaluation of land registry operations as a whole According to the type of legal entity Because of a small number of respondents, the differences only serve as illustration!

124. 124 Priorities for improvement What would you point out as three most important priorities to be improved in the land registry operations? OTHER REPLIES LESS THAN 4%: Backlogs clearing Satisfied with the work of LR department Rule of equality Accurate books Be co-operative with clients Phone communication with LR clerk Validation of data from the Internet Uniformity of practices Know-how Reducing of tasks Faster registration of changes per LR applications Better technical quality of equipment Faster changes registration Opening of new LR departments dealing with corruption Flexibility Better financial support

125. 125 Impact of the land registry operations on business In which way does the current functioning of the land registry impact your business? Average = 2.9

126. 126 Land registry progress Have you lately noticed any progress in the land registry operations?

127. 127 Segments with perceived progress In which segments of the land registry operations have you noticed progress? OTHER ANSWERS WITH LESS THAN 2%: Better connection with other services Establishing EDP Functionality Uniform form for the entire Croatia Friendliness of clerks Data processing Change of space Terrain registration Change of ownership registration Obtaining ownership certificate / possessory title Receipt of all applications Public awareness about o regulations connections in LR * Only respondents who noticed progress in the work of land registries, N=73

128. 128 Experience with one or more offices Are your experiences connected primarily to one municipal court land registry or more of them?

129. 129 Above-average positive/negative experiences Can you single out those municipal courts with land registries where you have above-average positive/negative experiences? PositiveNegative NN Beli Manastir 1 Benkovac1 Biograd na moru 11 Bjelovar 21 Buje 2 Crikvenica2 Čazma 1 Donja Stubica 1 Dubrovik 21 Dugo Selo 2 Đurđevac 1 Garešnica1 Gospić 1 Imotski 2 Ivanec 1 Ivanić-grad 2 Jastrebarsko 1 Karlovac 32 Klanjec 1 Korčula2 Koprivnica 5 Krapina 1 PositiveNegative NN Križevci 5 Krk 14 Makarska6 Mali Lošinj1 Metković 1 Novi Marof 11 Novska 2 Splitu 2 Omiš1 Opatija3 Otočac1 Ozalj 11 Pag 15 Petrinja 1 Pregrada 1 Pula 12 Rab 1 Rijeka 22 Rovinj 1 Samobor 22 Sesvete 1 Sisak 1 PositiveNegative NN Senj2 Splitu2 Stari grad (Hvar) 1 Sveti Ivan Zelina 1 Šibenik 14 Trogir2 Valpovo 1 Varaždin 9 Velika Gorica 13 Zabok 3 Zadar5 Zagreb 518 Zaprešić 1 Osijek 21 Županja 2 All of Istria 2 Land registries in smaller towns 1 All1 No answer15 * Only respondents experienced with more land registries

130. 130  Cadastral offices  Municipal court land registries  “Organized Land” project Poll results – customer satisfaction – legal entities

131. 131 Information about the project To what extent are you personally aware of the activities within the Real Property Registration and Cadastre Project? Average = 3.6

132. 132 Project evaluation How would you rate this project in general, from 1 to 5, where 1 means «very poor», and 5 «very good». Average = 3.5

133. 133 Project priorities What would you give as priorities within the Real Property Registration and Cadastre Project? OTHER ANSWERS WITH LESS THAN 2%: Better equipped technically Getting rid of public ownership Many services are finally being standardized Getting rid of state ownership Getting rid of county ownership Informing the public about the differences between the cadastre and the land registry Removal of corrupt officials They are not available even over the telephone Reform of as many land registers as possible Enabling communication of clerks with clients Respecting of pre-emption Increase transparency Legal security Priority is that the status from cadastre is governing Professionalism Restructuring agricultural lands Scanning all cadastral maps Registering ownership Registering residential objects

134. 134 Conclusions – the satisfaction of regular customers  Out of cadastral services, the regular customers most frequently use the service of obtaining the possessory title and obtaining excerpts from the cadastral map.  The customers are also satisfied the most with the way these services are provided. Specific comments regarding the work of the cadastre in general deal with the length of certain procedures, how slow they are, and in some cases, the unfriendliness of staff and their lack of expertise. In addition, some procedures are considered too complicated, and it’s believed that they could be streamlined.  The regular users rated the work of the cadastre lower than physical entities, both overall and on the level of individual aspects. This grade is a lot closer to the grade of the general population.  Harmonization with the real situation and with the situation in the land registries, and informatization and speeding up the procedures are given as main priorities for improving the work of the cadastre.  However, the majority of the regular users still perceives significant progress recently in the work of the cadastre.

135. 135 Conclusions – the satisfaction of regular customers  In land registries, regular users most frequently request possessory title, register change of ownership and register mortgages.  Customer satisfaction with the work of land registries is somewhat lower than with the work of the cadastre, both overall and for individual services.  A significant part of regular users mention that problems in the land registry work to some extent have a negative impact on their work.  Over 70% of the regular users have noticed an improvement recently in the work of land registries. Further improvement is needed in informatization, harmonization with the cadastre, greater speed and up-to-datedness and staff expertise.  Most customers are well informed about the project and give it quite a high grade.