Wayleaves & Property deeds question

baz8755

Location :England

We have a section of our land that is shown in the deeds to allow a neighbour to gain access to the highway.

Recently we received a wayleave agreement for the installation of Cable broadband for our neighbour.

Things have escalated and they are now sighting a clause in their deeds that states
'The free and uninterrupted right of connection to and of passage of running water and soil gas electricity and other services into and through the service installations now constructed or to be constructed in or under adjoining and neighbouring land comprised in the Estate of the Vendor together with full rights to enter on such adjoining or neighbouring land at all reasonable times and upon giving reasonable notice (except in case of emergency) for the purpose of inspecting repairing and maintaining such service installations doing as little damage as possible and forthwith making good any damage thereby occasioned the Purchaser paying a due and proportionate part of the expense of keeping the service installations in good repair and condition'

So things we would like to know what that actually means with affect to the neighbours rights and the way it affects the wayleave request.

user1977

Need some more context to make sense of the bit you've quoted - is that a clause about rights which the neighbour's property has over yours? At most it might mean your neighbour has a right to install the cable - it doesn't oblige you to sign whatever the cable company has presented you with.

Dustyevsky

The right of access to the highway is separate from the right for services to reach the neighbour's property, as quoted in both property's deeds. The part 'to be constructed' covers future uses like broadband cable, which might not have been foreseeable when the deed was drawn up.

We have a similar problem regarding access rights over neighbouring property, and the neighbour refuses to acknowledge these, or even discuss them. We have a similar clause, covering unforeseeable future uses. The work  will soon be carried out, and we'll try to protect the neighbour's interests as much as we can. However, by their responses, the neighbour has forfeited the opportunity to have any input regarding how it's done. I dare say the same could happen to you.

What is it about the 'equipment' for a broadband connection that worries you and do you think your interests will be better protected by not signing the wayleave?

CSI_Yorkshire

In the same way as you are reluctant to sign a "too open" wayleave, the companies are reluctant to sign a "too closed" wayleave.

What happens if they sign something that shows an exact route, specifying the exact model of equipment, thickness of cable, type of pole, type and size of splice box (or whatever else), and then when it comes to the work they find that ground conditions or an obstruction mean that it has to be in a slightly different place, or they change the model of box they use, or better equipment becomes available in future...

That would need cancelling of one wayleave and the negotiation and agreement of a new one - not a corner a company wants to back themselves into.

Your reluctance will also indicate to their legal team that it is a difficult site, so they'll want the agreement as open as possible as they will assume (rightly or wrongly) you will challenge things again for little reason.

user1977

I would expect any wayleave agreement to be a bit more specific than "we can install equipment in your land".

CSI_Yorkshire

baz8755 said:

CSI_Yorkshire said:

In the same way as you are reluctant to sign a "too open" wayleave, the companies are reluctant to sign a "too closed" wayleave.

What happens if they sign something that shows an exact route, specifying the exact model of equipment, thickness of cable, type of pole, type and size of splice box (or whatever else), and then when it comes to the work they find that ground conditions or an obstruction mean that it has to be in a slightly different place, or they change the model of box they use, or better equipment becomes available in future...

That would need cancelling of one wayleave and the negotiation and agreement of a new one - not a corner a company wants to back themselves into.

Your reluctance will also indicate to their legal team that it is a difficult site, so they'll want the agreement as open as possible as they will assume (rightly or wrongly) you will challenge things again for little reason.

That makes some kind of sense however it does have to be too specific just something like install a cable/box/etc within an outlined area, that would pretty much cover all eventualities and ensure that the landowner didn't one day find a telegraph tower in their lounge.

user1977 said:

I would expect any wayleave agreement to be a bit more specific than "we can install equipment in your land".

Yes, it should be somewhere in between - I do wonder whether they've mistaken quite how specific your request to "be specific" actually was.

Although many wayleaves do say things like "whatever equipment shall be needed for supply of the service". 

user1977

If it's an underground cable, I would say it's normal to least say that the apparatus is an underground cable and to indicate its route. The telecoms operator can still have flexibility to upgrade, relocate it within a certain width etc.

CSI_Yorkshire

baz8755 said:

user1977 said:

I would expect any wayleave agreement to be a bit more specific than "we can install equipment in your land".

The exact wording is
'You grant us the right to install, operate, keep and inspect the apparatus on, over or under the property and to carry out work on the property that is necessary to install, operate, maintain, adjust, inspect, alter, add to, connect to, replace, repair, upgrade or remove the apparatus and use the apparatus, and to enter the property and access the apparatus for these purposes, in addition to any other rights granted under the code."

And no mention is made as to location or the nature of 'apparatus'

That wording sounds quite normal.

Pushing for at least some clarity of 'apparatus' and some restricting of the boundary of 'the property' does seem sensible though.

And I think you're clear of the conditions from the title because you're not charging the neighbour or refusing to allow the connection.

Dustyevsky

When we negotiated with Openreach over the relocation of a telegraph pole, a surveyor liaised with us over the exact siting and we banged in a stake to mark the spot. This wasn't his preferred position, which was in a neighbour's view, but he was willing to listen to our wish that should be avoided.

At the outset, it was made very clear to us that Openreach have wide powers, so if push came to shove, they'd put equipment wherever they liked. I'm not sure, but perhaps this applies to all telecoms companies. Also, although the pole was sited in a mutually agreed spot, the route the cable took to it was chosen entirely by Openreach.

Jonboy_1984

Round here virgin tend to dig in a 1.5” plastic pipe that they then feed the cable through. This means future replacements can be pulled through without digging everything up, and reduces the risk of you putting a spade through it.