Advise concerning unauthorized BT line installed on freeholders land

m0bov

Good afternoon all, not strictly related to buying and selling but here goes....

We are Directors of a management company/freeholders. A few years ago a tenant in a house (not the leaseholder) had a BT line installed. The property already has BT but apparently a new line was needed. The leaseholder was not notified.

There were complaints regarding the shoddy cable run so BT returned to make good. In the process the freeholder company notified the leaseholder there was no permission of the cable to be run.

Cut a long story short, the leaseholder is just nagging the tenant, the tenant has yet to cancel their BT contract.

BT insist the line is legally sited based on their "2017 Code". Not wayleave was requested. They told we could serve "Code Notice" but at our own legal cost.

It appears if we serve notice we need to bill the leaseholder for the cost. However I am surprised BT can just come along, run a new line across a freeholders property and then refuse to remove it.

We also threatened to instruct a contractor to cut and remove the cable, at cost to the leaseholder but we were threatened with criminal damage if we did.

Any comments or suggestions on what else we can do?

davidmcn

What outcome are you trying to achieve? It's hardly unreasonable for properties to have phone lines installed, and yes BT have the right not to have their equipment summarily "evicted".

markin

Let the tenant and leaseholder have a phone line?

m0bov

Hi, the tenant already have a BT line, the issue is we cannot let other leaseholders run cables without prior permission. All the properties have cable tv/phone lines plus BT.

The outcome is to have the BT line removed, or possibly a wayleave agreement with some financial compensation for the freeholders.

Please remember the line is running across communal land. There are Deed of Covenants and terms of leases to comply with.

anselld

m0bov wrote: »

Hi, the tenant already have a BT line, the issue is we cannot let other leaseholders run cables without prior permission. All the properties have cable tv/phone lines plus BT.

The outcome is to have the BT line removed, or possibly a wayleave agreement with some financial compensation for the freeholders.

Please remember the line is running across communal land. There are Deed of Covenants and terms of leases to comply with.

Enforce the lease/covenants then, but it seems very petty. Exactly what loss would the freeholders be compensated for?

m0bov

anselld wrote: »

Enforce the lease/covenants then, but it seems very petty. Exactly what loss would the freeholders be compensated for?

I believe for the time spent in dealing with it and any inspections of the work/admin.

I dont feel its petty.

AdrianC

BT do not need a wayleave to install a cable to a property.

Does the lease explicitly specify that the leaseholder cannot install an additional phone line? If it's a covenant, are you the beneficiaries of the covenant?

markin

m0bov wrote: »

Hi, the tenant already have a BT line, the issue is we cannot let other leaseholders run cables without prior permission. All the properties have cable tv/phone lines plus BT.

The outcome is to have the BT line removed, or possibly a wayleave agreement with some financial compensation for the freeholders.

Please remember the line is running across communal land. There are Deed of Covenants and terms of leases to comply with.

"but apparently a new line was needed" I would think that means its faulty, If it wasn't installed with a spare line or pairs then should the freeholder not be paying for a new line anyway then?

kerri_gt

Is it dagerous? Is it a visible eyesore? Is it creating a problem for anyone?

Our houses are not supposed to have external aerials, one house has put one up, no one is particularly pleased about it and would rather it come down, it's annoying for those who have made provisions for internal aerials or sited them out of the way, but no one (as far as I know) thinks it's worth demanding the house takes it down.

Homersimpson

I assume this is some kind of fibre service that couldn't be brought in via the existing copper service?

Be careful because telecoms companies have some strange protection under law, on a much larger scale we had to get a telecoms mast removed and even with a court order we couldn't just turn off their power fed from our building.

Without seeing how bad it is it's hard to say but BT will no doubt have very good and expensive lawyers well versed in these kind of arguments.

Doozergirl

What recompense are you due as freeholders? It's hardly unreasonable to want a BT line, or even two. You don't need to spend any time on admin or inspections, that's a choice you're making.

Have you tried occupying your time with something useful?

There are first world problems and then there's this. Every leaseholder's worst nightmare - the petty management committee member with way too much time on their hands.