We walked into the machine room expecting to find a routine situation. The building had a maintenance contract. They paid every month. The property manager assumed everything was current and compliant.

Then we opened the binder.

The maintenance records stopped in 2022. Nothing for 2023. Nothing for 2024. Once in 2025 and it’s December 2025. A building that was paying for monthly preventive maintenance had no documented evidence that anyone had performed service in over two years.

This was not an unusual finding. This is what we see regularly when we conduct independent elevator audits across commercial buildings, hospitals, hotels, and residential properties. The gap between what buildings pay for and what they actually receive has become so wide that it raises a fundamental question: Is the traditional elevator maintenance contract model actually working for building owners?

What Do the Records Really Show?

Elevator maintenance records, also called the Maintenance Control Program or MCP, are required by ASME A17.1 code to be readily available in the machine room. These records document every maintenance visit, what work was performed, and when required testing was completed. They are the only objective evidence that the service you are paying for is actually happening.

In this particular elevator audit, the records from 2022 told their own story. The contract specified monthly maintenance visits. But looking at the actual documentation, we could see visits logged for March, April, May, and June. Then nothing until August. Then nothing until October. Half the year was missing entirely.

Fire service testing, which is required monthly, showed the same pattern. If your fire service records are not current, your elevator cannot pass code inspection. These are not optional tasks that can be deferred when the technician gets busy. They are fundamental safety requirements.

And yet, the invoices kept coming. The building kept paying. No one questioned it because no one was checking.

What Does the Equipment Tell Us?

We moved from the machine room to the car top to survey the equipment directly. This elevator had been modernized in 2015, which means the core components were less than ten years old. A 2015 modernization should still look relatively clean and well maintained if the service contract is being honored.

It did not.

The equipment showed visible signs of neglect. Dust accumulation, lack of cleaning, components that had clearly not been inspected or adjusted in months. The elevator modernization included quality components, a MOVFR two-door operator and a Formula Systems electronic door edge, but the condition did not reflect ongoing professional care.

This is what deferred maintenance looks like in practice. It is not dramatic. The elevator still runs. The doors still open and close. Passengers do not notice anything wrong. But every month that passes without proper service accelerates wear on critical components, shortens equipment lifespan, and increases the likelihood of unexpected breakdowns and expensive repairs.

Why Does This Keep Happening?

Building owners and property managers are busy. They have dozens of building systems to manage, tenant issues to address, budgets to balance. The elevator is one line item among many, and unlike HVAC or plumbing, most people have no training or experience in what proper elevator maintenance should look like.

So they sign a contract with a reputable company, pay the monthly fee, and assume the work is being done. This assumption is reinforced every time they see a technician badge in at the front desk or receive an invoice marked as completed service.

But here is the uncomfortable truth: the elevator service industry knows that most buildings do not verify. They know the machine room rarely gets viewed by building staff. They know the records sit in a binder that no one opens. The entire system operates on trust, and that trust is frequently misplaced.

This is not about bad actors or intentional fraud. It is about a structural problem in how elevator service is delivered and monitored. Technician shortages are real. Route pressures are real. When a company has more buildings to service than their workforce can properly handle, something has to give. Usually, what gives is the quality and completeness of elevator preventive maintenance, because buildings are not checking.

Who Is Actually Responsible for These Records?

This surprises most building owners: under ASME A17.1, the responsibility for maintaining the Maintenance Control Program falls on the building owner, not the elevator service provider.

The elevator company performs the work. But code assigns documentation responsibility to ownership. If an inspector arrives and the MCP is not available or not current, the building owner is held responsible for the violation. The service provider faces no penalty. It is common for elevator inspectors to overlook the Maintenance Control Program or MCP.

Most elevator companies are happy to let this responsibility remain ambiguous. They do not want the liability of maintaining compliance documentation. They benefit from the assumption that they are handling everything because it reduces scrutiny of their actual performance.

Understanding this division of responsibility changes how building owners should approach their elevator operations. You cannot outsource accountability for compliance. You cannot assume documentation is happening just because you are paying for service.

Is There a Better Way?

Here is the question we keep coming back to after elevator audits like this one: If buildings are paying for maintenance they are not receiving, why do we keep pretending the traditional contract model is working?

The standard approach, sign a full elevator service contract, pay monthly, assume compliance, has produced an industry-wide pattern of deferred maintenance and documentation gaps. Buildings pay for twelve monthly visits and receive six or none. They pay for fire service testing and find records missing. They pay for preventive maintenance and end up with equipment that looks like it has been neglected for years.

Alternative models are emerging that acknowledge this reality. Alternative Equipment Maintenance, or AEM, allows building owners to take more control over their service strategy. Instead of accepting a one-size-fits-all contract, buildings can customize their elevator maintenance approach based on actual equipment needs, usage patterns, and verified performance.

Some buildings are moving toward maintenance on demand or on-call service models, particularly in jurisdictions where code requires quarterly maintenance. Rather than paying for visits that may not occur, they pay for service when they actually need it and verify that the work is completed.

Technology is also changing the equation. Platforms like the ElevatorApp allow buildings to track when elevator service providers arrive, document what work is performed, and maintain their own independent records of maintenance activities. This shifts the dynamic from blind trust to verified performance.

These alternatives are not right for every building. Complex equipment, high-rise applications, and specialized systems may require traditional full-service contracts with appropriate oversight. But for many buildings, the question is worth asking: Are we actually getting value from our current elevator arrangement, or are we just paying for peace of mind we do not actually have?

What Can Building Owners Do Right Now?

Start by knowing what is in your machine room. When was the last time anyone from your building actually looked at the maintenance records? If the answer is never, or you do not know, schedule time this week to check. You do not need elevator expertise to count how many monthly entries appear in the log for 2024 or 2025.

Pull your current elevator service contract and understand what you are paying for. How many visits per year are specified? What testing is included? What documentation should you be receiving? Compare what the contract promises to what your records show.

Consider an independent elevator audit. As third-party consultants, we have no relationship with your elevator service provider and no incentive to protect them. We evaluate actual equipment condition against documented service, identify gaps, and give you an objective picture of what is really happening with your elevators.

Finally, think about whether your current approach to elevator management is actually serving your interests. The traditional model assumes trust. Maybe it is time to implement verification instead.

The Bigger Picture

We conduct elevator audits or elevator assessments like this one because we believe building owners deserve to know what they are getting for their money. The gap between contracted service and actual service has real consequences: shortened equipment life, higher repair costs, compliance violations, and safety risks for building occupants.

But this is not just about catching service providers doing less than they promised. It is about recognizing that the entire model may need to evolve. When the same pattern appears across hundreds of buildings, from commercial high-rises to hospitals to hotels to condominiums, the problem is systemic.

Building owners have more options today than they did ten years ago. Better tracking tools, alternative service models, and independent consulting support. The question is whether they will use those options or continue operating on assumption and trust.

If nothing else, open the machine room door. Look at the binder. See what the records actually show. What you find might change how you think about elevator maintenance entirely.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is a Maintenance Control Program and why does it matter?

A Maintenance Control Program, or MCP, is a documented plan required by ASME A17.1 code that outlines all maintenance tasks, testing schedules, and service activities for each elevator. It must be kept onsite and accessible. The MCP is your only evidence that contracted maintenance is actually being performed.

Is my elevator service provider responsible for keeping maintenance records?

No. Under ASME A17.1, the building owner is responsible for maintaining the MCP and all associated documentation. While your elevator service provider performs the work, the code assigns recordkeeping responsibility to ownership. If records are missing or incomplete during an inspection, the building owner faces the violation, not the service provider. An elevator consultant can help outline a program for your building.

How can I tell if my building is actually receiving the maintenance we pay for?

Review your machine room records and compare documented visits against what your contract specifies. If your contract includes monthly maintenance, there should be twelve entries per year with dates and descriptions of work performed. Significant gaps between documented visits indicate service is not being delivered as contracted. Most elevator Service contracts aren’t even specific to monthly service. An elevator consulting firm can help make sure that you have the right processes and procedures outlined for your building’s needs.

What is Alternative Equipment Maintenance, and is it right for my building?

Alternative Equipment Maintenance, or AEM, is a flexible approach that allows building owners to customize their elevator service strategy rather than accepting standard contract terms. It may include on-call service models, competitive vendor selection, and independent performance tracking. AEM can be appropriate for buildings seeking more control over service quality and costs, though complex or high-use equipment may still benefit from traditional full-service contracts with proper oversight. Buildings are starting to use on-demand elevator service when they need it.

What happens if my elevator fails inspection due to missing records?

If required records are missing or outdated during an inspection, your elevator may receive a violation or fail to pass code. The building owner is held responsible for documentation compliance regardless of what the service contract states. Violations can result in fines, required corrective action, and, in some cases, orders to take the elevator out of service until compliance is restored. The elevator service provider may have been responsible for ensuring that you pass inspection, which is typically outlined in your contract. An elevator consultant can help find this clause for you if needed.

How can an independent elevator consultant help with this situation?

An independent elevator consultant evaluates your equipment condition, reviews maintenance documentation, and compares actual service against contracted obligations. Because consultants have no financial relationship with service providers, they provide an objective assessment of whether you are receiving value from your current arrangement and can recommend strategies to improve accountability and performance.