The Guinness Partnership Limited (202408843)

Decision
Case ID	202408843
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	The Guinness Partnership Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Assured Tenancy
Date	19 December 2025

Background

1. The resident was unhappy that the landlord had not completed repairs to the bathroom and toilet. She was also unhappy with its communication, including its lack of response to her query as to whether she could install a gate, at her own cost, during fence replacement works. For context, the resident was granted her own tenancy for the property, having previously lived at the property under her late mother’s tenancy.

What the complaint is about

2. The complaint is about:
   1. The resident’s concerns about the landlord’s handling of repairs after May 2024.
   2. The landlord’s handling of various repairs, including the bathroom, toilet, flooring and fencing.
3. We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

Our decision (determination)

4. We have decided that the resident’s complaint about the landlord’s handling of repairs after May 2024 is outside of our jurisdiction.
5. We have found there was:
   1. Reasonable redress offered in the landlord’s handling of various repairs, including the bathroom, toilet, flooring and fencing.
   2. Reasonable redress offered in the landlord’s handling of the complaint.

We have not made orders for the landlord.

Summary of reasons

The resident’s concerns about the landlord’s handling of repairs after May 2024

6. The landlord has not had reasonable opportunity to investigate the resident’s concerns. In the interest of fairness, and in keeping with our Scheme, we have therefore decided not to investigate this complaint.

The handling of various repairs, including the bathroom, toilet, flooring and fencing

7. The landlord acknowledged failings in its response to the various repairs. It reflected on its handling, outlined its mistakes, and offered reasonable resolutions to put this right.

The landlord’s handling of the complaint

8. The landlord acknowledged its delayed responses and the time and trouble this caused.

Putting things right

Where we find service failure, maladministration or severe maladministration we can make orders for the landlord to put things right. We have the discretion to make recommendations in all other cases within our jurisdiction.

Recommendations

Our recommendations are not binding, and a landlord may decide not to follow them.

Our recommendations
The landlord should pay the £850 compensation offered to the resident within its complaint responses if it has not already done so. This is because we have found reasonable redress on the basis that it offered this.

 

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
4 July 2022	The resident’s tenancy started.
October 2022 to March 2024	The resident asked the landlord if it was responsible for repairs to her fence. While it raised at least 5 jobs to inspect and repair the fence, it did not replace it.
19 October 2023	The resident reported the pipework in her bathroom and downstairs toilet needed repairs.
29 December 2023	The resident asked when the bathroom would be replaced, she said it was last done in 1992. The landlord confirmed it was replaced in 2008, and it would consider a replacement after 30 years, so from 2038.
February 2024 to March 2024	The resident asked the landlord to install flooring in the downstairs toilet, and complete repairs to the bathroom, on 4 occasions.
13 March 2024	The resident made a complaint to the landlord. She was unhappy with its poor communication, such as it not responding to her request for her to install a gate during the fence works. She also felt its failure to complete repairs was because it incorrectly believed she had succeeded her mother’s tenancy.
2 April 2024	The landlord provided its stage 1 response to the resident. It: Apologised for its poor communication and the delay in completing the repairs, as well as the inconvenience caused to her. Said it would inspect her property on 5 April 2024 and provide an action plan for the required repairs. It would then raise the works and complete this within a further 20 working days. Offered £250 compensation. This consisted of £175 for its delayed consideration of her alterations request, and £75 for the time, trouble and inconvenience caused.
5 April 2024	The landlord inspected the property. It identified works needed to adjust the front door and kitchen cupboard doors. It also needed to install flooring and repair the toilet and pipework in the downstairs toilet. It needed to replace the bath panel and flooring, repair the extractor fan and check the pipework in the bathroom.
26 April 2024	The resident escalated her complaint. She was unhappy with a lack of updates following the inspection and she wanted the repairs arranged.
31 May 2024	The landlord provided its stage 2 response to the resident. It: Said its initial response lacked detail in response to her concerns and did not address all aspects of her complaint. Accepted it delayed acknowledging her complaint escalation, which caused overall delays in responding to her complaint. Explained the property did not have a void period to complete repairs in because she already lived at the property. But it said it failed to respond to her repair requests after her tenancy started in July 2022. Acknowledged delays and poor communication in the fence repairs. It said it had several opportunities to put this right but did not do so. Said the fence works had been approved. It said it could either complete the works around her privately installing the gate, or it could wait to agree a date to fit this with her at the same time. Reiterated that her bathroom was due for replacement from 2038. However, it acknowledged it failed to replace the flooring when she first reported this because it incorrectly believed she had succeeded the property. It also acknowledged delays in confirming its repairs action plan following the recent inspection in April 2024. Noted she had refused works to the bathroom and downstairs toilet because she wanted it to replace her bathroom instead. It asked her to make contact to arrange the repairs if she wants this. Increased its compensation offer to £850. This consisted of: –       £600 for the time, trouble and inconvenience caused. –       £150 for its poor communication. –       £100 for its complaint handling failures.
Referral to the Ombudsman	The resident remained unhappy with the landlord’s decision to not replace her bathroom. She felt it treated her differently because she lived in the property before securing her own tenancy. She felt it should replace her bathroom, as it would do for other new tenants.

 

What we found and why

The circumstances of this complaint are well known by the parties involved, so it is not necessary to detail everything that’s happened or comment on all the information we’ve reviewed. We’ve only included the key information that forms the basis of our decision of whether the landlord is responsible for maladministration.

Complaint	The resident’s concerns about the landlord’s handling of repairs after May 2024
Finding	Outside jurisdiction

9. The resident has told us about further issues which have occurred since her complaint exhausted the landlord’s complaint procedure. This includes later issues with the standard of the repairs after she agreed to these, and outstanding works needed to her bathroom.
10. While we note the resident’s concerns, we have not seen any evidence that the resident raised her concerns with the landlord and that it failed to respond. As such, these issues have not been considered by the landlord and have not exhausted its complaints procedure.
11. In the circumstances, it would not be fair or reasonable for us to investigate the resident’s concerns as part of this complaint. Therefore, in line with our Scheme, we have decided that this complaint falls outside of our jurisdiction. If the resident remains unhappy about this, she may wish to raise her concerns with the landlord now. Should she remain unhappy with its response, she may refer the matter back to us as a new complaint.

Complaint	The landlord’s handling of various repairs, including the bathroom, toilet, flooring and fencing
Finding	Reasonable redress

12. The landlord’s response to the resident’s concerns about its handling of the various repairs was fair and appropriate. It recognised its mistakes and proposed suitable resolutions. It:
    1. Accepted it had failed to appropriately manage her concerns with the bathroom, toilet, flooring, and fencing repairs. It provided a timeline of events, showing it had reflected on her experience.
    2. Acknowledged it had not actioned the bathroom and toilet repairs, including the flooring, because it incorrectly believed she had succeeded the tenancy. Its apology for this was appropriate given it had failed to fulfil its responsibilities set out in the tenancy agreement and its repairs policy.
    3. Reinspected the property following her complaint to identify the outstanding works. While its further poor communication prompted her escalation, it acknowledged this. It offered compensation to recognise the frustration and poor service experienced.
    4. Accepted “significant” delays in repairing the fence and responding to her request to add her own gate, with “extremely” poor communication, which was “unacceptable”. This showed it recognised the impact caused by its failures, especially given her concerns about her family’s safety given the fence opened onto a public car park.
    5. Provided 2 options of whether to arrange a suitable date for her to install the gate with its contractors, or whether it should complete the fence works first itself. This was reasonable as it allowed her to choose what worked best for her, given the inconvenience already caused.
13. In the final response, the landlord asked the resident to make contact if she wished to arrange the repairs. It noted she had declined the repairs because she instead wanted it to replace her bathroom. While we understand the resident’s position at the time, the landlord’s commitment to address the repairs was appropriate. This was in line with its responsive repairs policy, which outlines it would attempt to repair such elements before considering a replacement.
14. Additionally, it was appropriate for the landlord to attempt repairs first, in line with the Decent Homes Standard which outlines landlords should consider replacing bathrooms after 30 years. It is important to note that granting of a new tenancy itself does not mean the resident is entitled to a new bathroom.
15. The landlord’s overall offer of £750 compensation for the time, trouble and inconvenience caused, including its poor communication, was appropriate. Its failure to recognise her tenancy rights meant it initially refused and delayed the repairs. The amount reflected the significant and prolonged inconvenience experienced due to its poor handling of the various repairs. As such, the offer was proportionate and in line with our remedies guidance for failures which had a significant impact on the resident. We have therefore found it offered reasonable redress to her.

Complaint	The handling of the complaint
Finding	Reasonable redress

16. The landlord’s complaints policy aligns with our Complaint Handling Code (the Code).
17. The landlord acknowledged that it failed to respond within the timescales set out in both its policy and the Code. It:
    1. Took 13 working days to respond to the resident’s initial complaint. This was 3 working days beyond its target timescale. However, it did update the resident during this time, which was appropriate and in line with the Code.
    2. Took 23 working days to respond at stage 2. This was 3 working days beyond its target timescale.
    3. Recognised the delay at stage 2 was caused by a delay in acknowledging the resident’s complaint.
18. The landlord also acknowledged that its initial response lacked detail and did not address all of the resident’s concerns. It was appropriate for it to reflect on its complaint handling. In doing so, it provided an opportunity to outline its commitment to learning from these mistakes. It said it would share the findings to its repairs and complaints working group, showing its intentions to put things right and improve the service it provided going forward. Its overall offer of £100 compensation for its complaint handling was proportionate to reflect the time and trouble caused by both the delay in its responses and its poor initial response.
19. The landlord’s final complaint response showed positive complaint handling. The evidence shows it completed a thorough investigation with the relevant service areas involved. It then identified its failings and explained how it would put this right for the resident. As such, its response was detailed and empathetic, reflecting the principles of the Code.

Learning

20. The landlord’s final complaint response was a good example of positive complaint handling.

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

21. The landlord’s record keeping was appropriate.

Communication

22. The landlord acknowledged its poor communication and made an offer to put this right. It also explained how it would learn from its mistakes, which was appropriate.