From 13 January 2026, we will no longer accept new cases by email. Please use our online webform to submit your complaint. This helps us respond to you more quickly.

Need help? Call us on 0300 111 3000

The Guinness Partnership Limited (202339715)

Back to Top

REPORT

COMPLAINT 202339715

The Guinness Partnership Limited

7 May 2025


Our approach

The Housing Ombudsman’s approach to investigating and determining complaints is to decide what is fair in all the circumstances of the case. This is set out in the Housing Act 1996 and the Housing Ombudsman Scheme (the Scheme). The Ombudsman considers the evidence and looks to see if there has been any ‘maladministration,’ for example whether the landlord has failed to keep to the law, followed proper procedure, followed good practice, or behaved in a reasonable and competent manner.

Both the resident and the landlord have submitted information to the Ombudsman, and this has been carefully considered. Their accounts of what has happened are summarised below. This report is not an exhaustive description of all the events that have occurred in relation to this case, but an outline of the key issues as a background to the investigation’s findings.

The complaint

  1. The complaint is about the landlord’s handling of:
    1. Electrical works in the property.
    2. The resident’s associated complaint.

Background

  1. The resident is an assured tenant of the property, a house owned by the landlord. He has reported to this Service that he is vulnerable and uses an oxygen tank. The landlord has no vulnerabilities recorded for him.
  2. The resident reported a complete loss of power in the downstairs of his property on 13 July 2023. The landlord attended on 14 July 2023 and marked the works as complete. On 17 July 2023, he reported having only 1 working electrical socket in the house. He said the engineer that attended on 14 July 2023 said the property needed a full rewire. It discussed a decant with him, but he did not accept this due to his dogs.
  3. On 7 August 2023, the resident complained to the landlord as he remained without power in the kitchen. He asked it to rewire the kitchen and to reimburse him for the food lost during the loss of power, along with fuel costs for travelling to the supermarket each day.
  4. The landlord sent its stage 1 complaint response to the resident on 5 September 2023. It said it completed rewires to the upstairs of the property and the conservatory on 25 July 2023. It restored power to the kitchen and recommended a future rewire if any further problems occurred. As he had reported this, it was due to complete the kitchen rewire on 11 and 12 September 2023. It declined to reimburse for lost food and said this would be for contents insurers. It offered compensation of £75 as a goodwill gesture.
  5. The resident asked the landlord to escalate his complaint on 21 September 2023 as it had not completed the promised works. He said it had replastered the kitchen, but he was still without kitchen units, a cooker, sink and water. He felt the landlord’s stage 1 offer of compensation was insulting.
  6. On 3 October 2023, the landlord sent its final complaint response to the resident. It said it completed all works to the kitchen on 25 and 26 September 2023 but that he had since told it the water was not back on, and it had not plumbed the kitchen sink in. It said it aimed to complete all outstanding repairs by 20 October 2023. It apologised and made an increased compensation offer of £160.
  7. The resident remained dissatisfied with the landlord’s response and offer of compensation and brought his complaint to the Ombudsman for investigation.
  8. After the resident had brought his case to us, the landlord reviewed the complaint. On 7 October 2024, it sent the resident a revised stage 2 complaint response. It apologised for its offer of compensation not reflecting the time he spent pursuing a resolution to his complaint. It offered an additional £100, bringing its total offer across all its responses to £260.

Assessment and findings

Electrical works

  1. The landlord’s repairs policy includes a complete loss of power within its emergency repair category. It will either repair or complete a temporary repair within 24 hours of the report. If it completes a temporary repair, it will return within a “reasonable timeframe” to complete the repair.
  2. Also, in the landlord’s repairs policy is its response time to routine repairs. It aims to complete these within 28 calendar days and sooner if it can. It defines routine repairs as those which are not emergencies.
  3. The landlord’s attendance after the resident’s report of 13 July 2023, of a loss of power downstairs was within 24 hours, as per its policy. Its repairs records note that it completed works but this did not include any further information. Its first response was prompt and within policy timescales.
  4. The resident called the landlord on 17 July 2023 as he still had only 1 working plug socket. He said its contractor told him on 14 July 2023 that the property needed a full rewire. The contractor told there was rodent damage to wiring and the property needed a new cable installation. It asked them for quote for works.
  5. The evidence provided shows that there had been no conversation between the landlord and its contractor until the resident chased it for an update. The repair completion notes were insufficient and did not provide enough information for the landlord to raise further works.
  6. On 17 July 2023, the landlord discussed a temporary move with the resident due to the loss of power. He was reluctant to accept a hotel as he did not want to place his dogs into kennels as they are not good with other dogs. He had no friends or family to help. He asked it if it could pay him money directly so he could top this up and book accommodation suitable for his dogs. It agreed to ask about this internally and he agreed that he would remain in the property overnight.
  7. The landlord visited the resident on 18 July 2023 and discussed the temporary move again. It again offered hotel accommodation and kennels for the dogs but later in its stage 2 response it said it told him that it could not find accommodation that would allow them. As such, he decided to stay in the property without electricity. It has since told this Service that its decant policy and procedure do not allow for direct payment for residents to find their own temporary accommodation.
  8. The landlord’s decant policy states that when offering temporary accommodation, it will account for the housing needs of the household. It will, where possible, offer a home on a like-for-like basis. If not, it will follow its bedroom standard. It will account for how to accommodate pets. This may include offering kennels where it is not possible to find alternative accommodation which allows pets. It says it will arrange furnished accommodation, usually a hotel, bed and breakfast or serviced apartment subject to its discretion and availability.
  9. The resident explained his reasoning for declining kennels for his dogs to the landlord. It said that it could not find accommodation that allowed dogs. There is no evidence that it explored alternative options, however it worded its policy as such that any offers will be at its own discretion. Therefore, while it would have been good practice for it to consider alternative options, we are unable to find failing on this part of the case.
  10. The landlord completed works to restore some power on 20 July 2023. However, on 24 July 2023, the resident called it to chase follow-on repairs. He said he still had sockets not working. The next day, he told it power was working upstairs and, in the conservatory, but not in the lounge. He had partial power in the kitchen. It raised works on the same day.
  11. On 1 August 2023, the landlord’s contractor said they had completed works that day but if the problem persisted, they would recommend a full kitchen rewire. They noted that the landlord would need to confirm if it had resolved a pest issue. They said the kitchen looked like the resident or a previous tenant had installed it. The resident reported again that no sockets were working in the kitchen 3 days later. It raised further works on the same day, 4 August 2023. It should have treated these as emergency works as the loss of power to sockets left him unable to cook or safely store food.
  12. The resident complained to the landlord on 7 August 2023 about its handling of electrical repairs. He explained that he had to dispose of 2 freezers and 1 fridge full of food and was having to shop daily to avoid food waste. He said that having no power in the kitchen was causing difficult living conditions. He requested that it complete the recommended rewiring of the kitchen and compensation for the lost food and increased fuel costs.
  13. The landlord asked its contractor for a quote for rewiring on 8 August 2023. However, the resident had to chase it for an update on 17 August 2023. It contacted the contractor again and confirmed that he was happy for them to dismantle the kitchen. It raised works on 23 August 2023 following receipt of the contractor’s quote. This was 16 days after he told it he had no power in the kitchen, and this was not an acceptable delay. It had made no efforts to complete a temporary repair in this time.
  14. The landlord sent its stage 2 response to the resident on 5 September 2023. It confirmed the date for works of 11 and 12 September 2023 and that he would need to sign a waiver saying any damage to the kitchen was not its responsibility.
  15. In its response, the landlord said it was unable to reimburse the resident for the loss of food and that this was something a contents insurer would have been able to help with. It found no failure in its handling of repairs, saying it attended with its policy timescale for routine repairs. It offered compensation of £75, broken down as follows:
    1. £50 as a contribution for the loss of food.
    2. £25 for inconvenience.
  16. The landlord did not acknowledge the delay in restoring power to the kitchen in its response. This was not reasonable. It was correct in saying that the food should have been subject to an insurance claim and its offer of £50 was fair in for this aspect of the case. Its compensation policy says it will need evidence by way of receipts or proof of damage to consider compensation, so its response to this point was appropriate. However, it would have been good practice to consider a partial rent refund for the loss of kitchen facilities alongside the £25 inconvenience amount which was at the lowest end of its compensation scale.
  17. The landlord’s contractor attended to complete works as planned on 11 and 12 September 2023. However, these overran, and the resident requested escalation of his complaint on 21 September 2023 because while the replastering was complete, he was still without the use of a cooker, hob, sink, kitchen units and water. He said that in the circumstances, he felt its original compensation offer was insulting.
  18. The landlord sent its stage 2 complaint response to the resident on 3 October 2023. It provided a history of works and said that it was aiming to complete all remaining repairs and works by 20 October 2023. It apologised for failures since its stage 1 response and acknowledged that it provided poor service. It increased its offer of compensation to £160, replacing its earlier stage 1 offer of £75, broken down as follows:
    1. £100 for time, trouble, and inconvenience.
    2. £50 gesture of goodwill towards the cost of food.
    3. £10 for poor communication.
  19. The resident contacted the landlord on 16 October 2024 to report that the works remained incomplete. He refused its offer of compensation and requested it increase this to £1,000 alongside a 6-week rent refund. It replied to him the next day and said it would review the compensation offer upon completion of works, but that it could not consider his requested amount.
  20. The landlord completed all works on 20 October 2023, 77 days after the resident reported losing electricity in the kitchen. This was equivalent to almost 11 weeks. Its response exceeded both its emergency and routine repair policy timescales. There is no evidence to show it reviewed the compensation offer as suggested at this time.
  21. Following correspondence with the Ombudsman, the landlord sent a revised stage 2 response to the resident on 7 October 2024. This was over 1 year since it sent its original stage 2 response. It did not offer any further findings or remedy for its handling of electrical repairs.
  22. Overall, there were failures in the landlord’s handling of electrical repairs. These followed the resident’s second report of total electrical failure in the kitchen on 4 August 2023. Its offer of compensation was not adequate in the circumstances, and it did not treat the matter with the urgency needed. Its compensation policy does not address its approach to rent refunds, but industry standard is around 30% of the weekly rent for loss of use of a kitchen. We have kept this in view in making our orders, using the rent amount for the period of the complaint. However, we have also considered that the landlord did offer to temporarily rehouse the resident, and this would have significantly the impact of the loss of electricity on him. As the challenge to doing so was not entirely within the landlord’s control, our overall calculation of the compensation ordered also reflects this.

Complaint handling

  1. The landlord has a 2-stage complaints policy. It will acknowledge a complaint within 2 working days of receipt. It will provide a decision at stage 1 of its process within 10 working days of logging a complaint. It will respond at stage 2 within 20 working days of an escalation request.
  2. The landlord’s compensation policy says that it may offer a compensation payment in recognition of distress and inconvenience caused when something has gone wrong, and it is at fault. It allows for payments up to £250 for issues resolved within a reasonable time which resulted in a minor inconvenience having some impact on the customer.
  3. The resident complained to the landlord on 7 August 2023. It acknowledged and responded to his complaint on 5 September 2023, 20 working days after receipt. This exceeded the response timeframes set in its policy. It did not identify the delay in acknowledging or responding to the complaint, nor did it offer any redress. It would have been good practice for it to apologise and offer a small compensatory payment in line with its policy.
  4. The resident asked the landlord to escalate his complaint on 25 September 2023. It responded on 3 October 2023, within policy timescales. However, it did not acknowledge the stage 1 delays in this response. Instead, it said he complained on 21 August 2023 and that it had responded within 10 working days, which was incorrect. It has provided evidence showing that it tried to contact him on 8 August 2023 to discuss his complaint. It then told its contractor about the complaint on 17 August 2023. It did not include this information in its response.
  5. Overall, the landlord did not recognise the failings in its stage 1 complaint handling. As such, it did not offer any remedy for the delays. Its actions were not in line with its complaints or compensation policies.
  6. In the landlord’s revised stage 2 complaint response on 7 October 2023, it acknowledged its stage 1 failings. It found that his contact on 7 August 2023 was evidence of the resident’s dissatisfaction with its service, and it should have properly registered this as a complaint. It apologised for not doing so and offered an extra £100 compensation for this. This was in addition to the £160 offered at stage 2 for repairs.
  7. The landlord’s remedies (compensation and apology) were in line with its compensation policy. However, it is unlikely that it would have taken this action had the resident not brought his complaint to this Service. The 1-year delay in providing the revised offer supports this. The offers made are in line with the Ombudsman’s remedies guidance and as such we consider this to be reasonable.

Determination

  1. In accordance with paragraph 52 of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, there was service failure in respect of the landlord’s handling of electrical works.
  2. In accordance with paragraph 53.b of the Housing Ombudsman Scheme, the landlord has offered redress to the complainant, which, in the Ombudsman’s opinion, satisfactorily resolves the complaint about the landlord’s handling of the resident’s associated complaint.

Orders

  1. Within 28 days of this determination, the landlord is ordered to:
    1. Pay the resident compensation totalling £480, comprising:
      1. £260 as previously offered across its complaint responses if it has not paid this already.
      2. £200 partial rent refund for the period covering 4 August to 20 October 2023 for loss of kitchen facilities.
      3. £20 partial rent refund for the period covering 14 July to 20 July 2023 for loss of kitchen facilities.
    2. The landlord must pay this amount to the resident directly, unless he otherwise requests it pay this directly to his rent account.
    3. Provide proof of compliance with the above orders to this Service.