Advise concerning unauthorized BT line installed on freeholders land

NeilCr

Has the installation of the line actually caused any damage to the communal land?

I am a director of an estate and we are very much in the live and let live group. If there was no damage then we wouldn't be worried. Having said that I do understand it can be irritating when covenants are broken.

If you really want to carry this on then I guess your next step would be a solicitors letter to the leaseholder - but I certainly wouldn't bother unless there was a cost of repair/major breach.

m0bov

Hi all. Yes it is an eye saw with visable cabling, a metal post and a cover fitted into the paving.

[Deleted User]

Do you have a photo?

I wonder if you are making a mountain out of a molehill. This is one cable in how large an area?

I assume there are sewerage manholes, gas, electric and water points etc. This was done YEARS ago?

Isn't the tenant entitled to have a landline/internet? As has been suggested, the previous cable might have needed replacing.

I wonder if maybe there are more useful things to spend time on?

Tom99

Give up, you are on a hiding to nothing.

da_rule

Under the Communications Act 2003, which was amended to introduce the 2017 code, code rights can be conferred by an occupier of land. Occupier obviously has a much broader definition than ‘owner’.

As BT are stating that the only way to get rid of them is to serve notice under the code, they must be fairly certain that they have a valid code agreement in place.

As they have a code agreement, they do not need a wayleave. Also, whilst they do have to pay for their rights under the code agreement, the new calculations introduced under the new code mean these payments are often little more than a peppercorn. There was a recent Tribunal case where Virgin Media ended up paying £1 to lay cables under hundreds (if not thousands) of meters of highway verge.

You appear to have somewhat limited options.
1) Serve the notice on BT, I believe the notice period is 18 months;
2) If the work is of a poor standard ask them to come out and rectify it;
3) Take action for breaching the lease. This would seem somewhat harsh as the leaseholder was as in the dark as you were it seems. Also, your damages would probably be limited to the costs of making good the land and any costs you incur in serving the notice.

If the cable is for a faster type of broadband then could you ask BT to extend it to the entire block? It might make the block more attractive and, if your leases are properly written, you’ll be able to recover and costs as service charge.

babyblade41

The prime example of being petty,

The persons may want a second line for business or for some other legit reason.

This is taking your duties to idiot level

NeilCr

babyblade41 wrote: »

The persons may want a second line for business

It's pretty likely that if there is a covenant to stop additional telecoms lines then there will be be one forbidding running a business from home.

m0bov for clarity.

Are the visible cabling, post and cover on communal ground?

babyblade41

NeilCr wrote: »

It's pretty likely that if there is a covenant to stop additional telecoms lines then there will be be one forbidding running a business from home.

m0bov for clarity.


They maybe working from home and not actually running a business ..I just think this is someone having too much time to spare.

NeilCr

babyblade41 wrote: »

.I just think this is someone having too much time to spare.

I think it may be a different issue if it's been done on communal ground with the post etc. What's to stop everyone doing it now the precedent has been set. Maybe with bigger posts, more cabling etc. If it's within the confines of the house then, yes, I'd leave well alone.

One of the problems with covenants is that once one is broken it opens the door for others with "bigger and better" ideas.

Doozergirl

NeilCr wrote: »

It's pretty likely that if there is a covenant to stop additional telecoms lines then there will be be one forbidding running a business from home.

m0bov for clarity.

Are the visible cabling, post and cover on communal ground?

You can run a business that has zero impact on anyone.

They could just be an avid gamer or like streaming 4k cat videos. Either way, using the internet is not a genuine cause for enforcing any kind of covenant. If a tenant is allowed quiet enjoyment, then a leaseholder must be.