The Guinness Partnership Limited (202412626)

Decision
Case ID	202412626
Decision type	Investigation
Landlord	The Guinness Partnership Limited
Landlord type	Housing Association
Occupancy	Secure Tenancy
Date	21 November 2025

Background

The property is a 2-bedroom flat on the top floor of a 4-floor block. The resident has lived there since March 2017 with her son. She has reported asthma, mobility issues (knee and hip pain), anxiety and depression. She also referred to her son having chronic fatigue. She reported experiencing frequent lift breakdowns which has had cumulative negative impact on her physical and mental health, leading to this complaint.

What the complaint is about

The resident’s complaint is about the landlord’s response to lifts breaking down.
We have also considered the landlord’s handling of the associated complaint.

Our decision (determination)

We have found that:
1. There was maladministration in the landlord’s response to lifts breaking down.
2. The landlord has made an offer of reasonable redress with regards to its complaint handling.

We have made orders for the landlord to put things right.

Summary of reasons

The response to lifts breaking down

The landlord was unable to show that it had given due consideration to the high frequency of lift breakdowns, and the contactors’ reports identifying various mechanical faults on multiple occasions. It was unable to show it had taken timely and effective action to resolve the persistent issues of lifts breakdowns.

The complaint handling

There were some minor delay and inaccuracies in issuing complaint responses, for which the landlord has offered an apology and £50 compensation. We consider this was sufficient to mitigate the inconvenience it caused to the resident.

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.

Orders

Landlords must comply with our orders in the manner and timescales we specify. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of compliance with our orders by the due date set.

Order	What the landlord must do	Due date
1	Apology order The landlord must apologise in writing to the resident for the failures identified in this report. The landlord must ensure: The apology is specific to the failures identified in this decision, meaningful and empathetic. It has due regard to our apologies guidance.	No later than 19 December 2025
2	Compensation order The landlord must pay the resident £500 (inclusive of the £300 already paid to the resident) to recognise the distress and inconvenience caused by failings to appropriately respond to the resident’s reports of lift breakdowns. This must be paid directly to the resident by the due date. The landlord must provide documentary evidence of payment by the due date.	No later than 19 December 2025
3	Inspection order The landlord must conduct a new inspection of the lifts. It must take all reasonable steps to ensure the inspection is completed by the due date. The inspection must be completed by an externally appointed qualified person with expertise to complete the type of inspection required. The landlord must provide the resident and our service with a copy of the survey report by the due date. What the inspection must achieve The landlord must ensure that the expert: Inspects all the lifts of the property and produces a written report with photographs. Reviews and takes into account the issues previously identified by previous contractors, engineers and technicians from the period of June 2024 to November 2025. The survey report must set out: The most likely cause of the lift issues. A full scope of works to achieve a lasting and effective resolution to the issue. The likely timescales to commence and complete the work.	No later than 09 January 2026
4	Completing the works The landlord must take all steps to ensure the work as identified in the survey (as ordered above) is completed promptly and in any event by the due date. If the landlord cannot complete the works in this time, it must explain to us, by the due date: Why it cannot complete the works by the due date and provide evidence to support its reasons. It must provide a revised timescale of when it will finish the works; or Explain the steps it has taken to ensure the works were completed and provide supporting evidence. It must provide a revised timescale if it is able to or explain why it cannot. Whether suitable alternative accommodation is necessary and will be made available to the resident until the work is completed.	No later than 13 February 2026

Recommendations

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

Our recommendations
The landlord should contact the resident to obtain updated information on her health vulnerabilities. It should then provide advice accordingly on alternative housing options for her such as whether she should submit new medical information to support her in her applications.

Our investigation

The complaint procedure

Date	What happened
27 Feb 2024	The resident raised a complaint to say both lifts had been frequently breaking down, affecting her knee issues and asthma.
26 Mar 2024	The landlord issued a stage 1 response to say: It acknowledged the resident had raised the same issue for some time, but it could only consider events starting from 27 February 2023 (12 months ago). It acknowledged the lifts kept breaking down which had caused the resident distress and inconvenience, for which offered £125.
5 Apr 2024	The resident asked to escalate her complaint.
12 Apr 2024	The landlord acknowledges the resident’s request for escalation.
13 May 2024	The landlord emailed the resident to say it would require 20 more working days to respond and would provide final response by 10 June 2024.
6 June 2024	The landlord issued a stage 2 response which read as follows: Since May 2023 there had been at least 86 reports of lift breakdowns from either the resident or other people living in the same block. While it had always attended repairs within expected timeframes it acknowledged the frustration and immense convenience that the resident experienced. It had surveyed the lifts for replacement in late-2020 and mid-2021 and had received no recommendations for replacement, therefore it would continue to do repairs. The frequent lift breakdowns had been exacerbated by ongoing anti-social behaviour (ASB) where people have forced open the vents connected to the building’s fire prevention systems, activating fire security and putting the lifts out of order. It had closed several areas of the building to minimise or stop the ASB. It apologised that at stage 1 it did not acknowledge some occasions when the resident had also contacted the landlord regarding this issue and received no callback or response. It offered £300 in recognition of the personal impact to the resident and its poor communication, and another £50 for delays in complaint responses.
Sep 2024	The resident referred the matter to our service.
Nov 2025	The resident explained that despite the landlord doing further repairs, the issues remained unresolved, and the lifts were still frequently breaking down. She said she had stopped raising the issue with the landlord as the landlord always reverted with the same ineffective answers and she had exhausted her energy in pursuing this complaint.

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 response to reports of lifts breaking down
Finding	Maladministration

There is no dispute between the parties that the lifts broke down frequently despite the landlord’s repairs. The landlord has acknowledged this as fact and apologised for the resident’s distress and inconvenience. It has also paid her £300 in compensation in recognition of this impact to her in June 2024.

However, we find the landlord has missed opportunities to address the resident’s concerns satisfactorily. In its stage 2 response, the landlord explained to the resident that it has done only repairs for the lifts rather than replacement, on the basis that its previous surveys from 2020 and 2021 did not recommend replacement. These surveys would have been from 3 years ago or longer by then.
This response indicates a lack of consideration for the high number of reports of lift failures since 2021. The records from 2023 to 2024 also show clearly that the repairs during that time period had not been effective in preventing frequent breakdowns. In these circumstances, it would have been reasonable for the landlord to consider an escalated response and reviewed its approach instead of repeating routine repairs. It could have arranged for a survey at stage 1 or 2 to investigate the faults, but it missed this opportunity.
According to an undated email shown to us by the resident, around July or August 2024 (after the internal complaints process came to an end) the landlord informed her that it did instruct a lift consultant to do a survey. The landlord stated this survey identified ‘remedial works’ (no other details were provided) but that replacement was not necessary.
We have not been provided with a copy of the survey report from July/August 2024. However, some of the previous notes from the contractors doing repairs starting from February 2024 have referred to several defects, including but not limited to:
1. ‘Car top control not conforming to current safety standards and should be upgraded’ (February 2024).
2. ‘Car floor is badly corroded. Strong smell of urine. Misuse. Car position indicator is inoperative’ (February 2024).
3. ‘Pit emergency stop switch does not conform to current safety standards and should be upgraded’ (February 2024).
4. ‘Ground floor landing position indicator is faulty’ (February 2024).
5. ‘Anti-intruder landing lock release system is intermittent in operation. [We] recommend it be bypassed or overhauled to ensure the release of trapped pass’ (February 2024).
6. ‘New ground floor landing door hanging plate required’ (June 2024).
7. ‘New lock contacts and shortening block’ (June 2024).
8. ‘[Contractor] recommend[s] a valve block overhaul… new oil, new sensors and set up by a hydraulic expert’ (June 2024).
There have also been reports at different times that the lifts were operational and safe to use, for example, from 9 April 2024 and 19 June 2024 (‘the lift was operating adequately’). However, the significant differences in findings at different times should in itself be an indication that a more comprehensive check is needed.
The landlord explained to the resident at stage 2 that some of the breakdowns/failures were due to ASB interfering with the fire systems. It closed off some areas of the building to resolve this. While it is positive that the landlord identified this issue, it is unclear how much of the lift failures could be apportioned to ASB. The notes from previous repairs would suggest that on most if not all occasions, the engineer/technician identified mechanical or electrical faults with the lifts, rather than the system needing a simple reset.
We have not seen proof from the landlord that this survey in July/August 2024 took into account those reports of defects and safety concerns (as listed above), as well as the recommendations by engineers previously working on the lifts. It would have been appropriate for the landlord to do so, in order to have consistency in the diagnoses of the problem and help it make an informed decision on whether to replace the lifts.
The resident has already explained to the landlord that due to her asthma and mobility issues, lift breakdowns take a significant toll on her physical and mental health. Access to fully operational lifts was essential to her wellbeing and ability to continue to live in this property. In view of her personal circumstances the landlord should have considered offering extra support to her.
According to the records provided (which started from February 2023) the resident had reported this issue since May 2023. The landlord acknowledged she had made similar reports before February 2023, although she did not make a formal complaint until February 2024. For about 2.5 years (up till November 2025) the resident has had only intermittent and unreliable access to operational lifts. This was an untenable situation for her.
The resident has explained to us that as of 2025, the lift situation remains unresolved as they were still experiencing frequent breakdowns. The landlord has shown us records that from September 2024 to October 2025 there were a series of temporary repairs replacing different parts of the lifts, including rollers, doors and the main processor board. This evidence supported that the lifts were still breaking down frequently and there was no reassurance that the patchwork repairs have provided a lasting resolution.
The landlord should have taken more timely and effective action to fully investigate and handle the problem. While it is positive the landlord has offered an apology and some compensation at stage 2, we consider £300 does not go far enough to reflect the extent of the impact to the resident over this prolonged period of time. This is particularly so in light of the resident’s reported vulnerabilities of asthma and mobility issues.
The resident has applied for housing transferral due to the impact from lift breakdowns and other medical needs. The landlord has confirmed she has an active application. As the lift issues continue to have an impact on her, we have recommended the landlord provide the resident with an update on her housing application and explanation of what other options might be available.
Due to the reasons stated above we find there was maladministration in the landlord’s response to the resident’s reports of lifts breaking down.

Complaint	Complaint handling
Finding	Reasonable redress

The landlord required extensions at both stages 1 and 2 of the complaint responses and informed the resident ahead of time. It provided her with a detailed breakdown of the complaint response timeline at stage 2 which was positive to see. It also apologised for a minor miscommunication during acknowledgment of the resident’s escalation request, when it said a final response was due on 10 May 2024, but it should have been 13 May 2024. It offered £50 in recognition of any distress and inconvenience caused by these relatively minor delays and errors.
The landlord’s complaint handling overall was in line with the Complaint Handling Code. There is no evidence that the minor delays in responses caused significant impact to the resident. We consider the apology and £50 was reasonable remedy to mitigate any impact to her.

Learning

Knowledge information management (record keeping)

Our Spotlight Report on repairs (‘Repairing Trust’) states that it is vital landlords and contractors are clear of the specifics of the repair or maintenance issues from the outset. Landlords and contractors should keep a clear record of this and update it, and any further supporting documents or reports should be shared and uploaded onto the relevant record.
In this case if the landlord had consolidated the previous reports from engineers working on the lifts including the defects and faults they identified, and if the surveyors had been able to access this information, it may have helped to reach a more evidence-based decision, resulting in a better outcome for the parties involved.