Wayleave agreement Quantum Air Fibre FTTH Difficulties

Ok, so I hear of Quantum Air Fibre
I have a shufty at their prices and service, all seems good.

I'm renting at present. My landlord wants:

Any request to connect broadband into our properties needs to be accompanied with the correct legal documentation (the wayleave) and supporting plans and details of the work involved

But Quantum seems unsure.

We have never had to arrange for a wayleave agreement for any of our installations so I don't understand why they would require one . We have several installations fitted in (redacted local area similar landlords) properties and we haven't come across any issues like this before .

(emphasis and redaction mine)
Is there anyone more conversant with these type of things who can offer advice?

The only option I see is going with a more expensive larger company who has all their ducks lined up like BT - who I'm trying not to sign with.

Is this into a flat or a house?

It's a semi detached bungalow, with own back and front lawn

The Fibre will be coming from the pole directly at bottom of garden and following along the BT Copper line

Is this FTTP or a local area Wifi. Local area Wifi should be close to fitting a satellite dish so maybe landlord is confusing the two.

From Quantum

We would be following the route your Bt Cable is currently coming in. As far as I am aware your property is currently fed overhead to your property so we would pull our fibre line alongside the current Bt line to your property. Once at your property all we would need to do is drill a small hole through an external wall into your property to mount a small box the same size as your current Bt box on the wall.

Already have FTTC a few hundred yards away, use it with Zen internet, good but slow and expensive.
This is to upgrade to FTTH

Are you dealing directly with the landlord or through a managing agent?

hi dect,
I'm emailing directly with someone in the relevant department of the housing association

I personally think it's such a inconsequential install that it doesn't need any legal docs.

But I also understand it the equipment Ie cable and internal box needs to be left in property, and be accessible to service if needed by quantum staff, then it probably does...

I know Openreach have wayleaves

Maybe this is Quantums fault - maybe it's Landlord over reach I just don't know

In reply to a post by TransmitThis:

I'm renting at present. My landlord wants:

Any request to connect broadband into our properties needs to be accompanied with the correct legal documentation (the wayleave) and supporting plans and details of the work involved

The landlord *is* entitled to request details of the work to be done, and can grant or refuse permission.

They probably don't want to grant permission without a paper record of exactly what they are permitting.

Perhaps Quantum can provide a general "landlord's permission to install" type of document, which includes a summary of the fibre route as you've just described, for the landlord to sign.

Yes you are most likely correct candlerb,

After reading some more online, landlords don't necessarily "need" a wayleave they could just work with the ISP directly and grant access to install.

But maybe where this is faltering is, the "landlord" is a very large association and the ISP is a very small firm.

So I guess the Landlord do need the documents, and Quantum is too small to have those things ready or organised.

These docs are pretty generic they are even downloadable, I could literally go grab one now edit it to include our details and pass it over to them to sign...

Sigh, I guess I'll keep pushing and see where it goes.

It's not the only choice for FTTH I guess the reason it is cheaper than the competition is becoming apparent.
Maybe this is a narrow escape?

I don't know about "narrow escape", but a learning opportunity for Quantum certainly.

A little harsh, Although seems like contractual agreements should be something that was enquired about when setting up an ISP company?

I stand to be corrected of course, but so far I'm getting the tingles that saving £200pa may not be worth the time and issues that may be a consequence of going with them?

Large well established ISPs / network builders will simply ask (in writing) to confirm that you own the property - if ‘yes’, tick in the box, permission to install requisite cabling, termination and any equipment is implicit.

If ‘no’ then they’ll want a wayleave agreement signed. Effectively this is permission from the landowner / freeholder / landlord / their duly authorised agent.

This is protection for the network owner / builder, such that they can’t later be taken to task for installing their gear on private property, and either ordered to remove it or worse.

There are now laws in place in the UK to get hitherto unresponsive landlords / freeholder to respond to requests for wayleave / consent. But nothing can force a landowner to actually give their permission. It is after all their property.

Good info Pheasant thanks

I was literally just on OfCom - Electronic Communications Code site having a little look at the policies around this.

(I guess I have way too much time on my hands)

Still trying to work out why a small provider wouldn't have a wayleave policy.
I much prefer to encourage competition and give the smaller companies my business

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

Large well established ISPs / network builders will simply ask (in writing) to confirm that you own the property - if ‘yes’, tick in the box, permission to install requisite cabling, termination and any equipment is implicit.

Plenty of housing associations in my area that require advance permission before cable TV or Sky systems are installed. Some tried to block Sky systems in the 1990s and early 2000s, and so people just installed anyway - so instead of a neat communal installation there are 3 story blocks of flats with 12 dishes outside…. Madness.

One of my friends used to live in a block where the landlord/housing association forced them to take down the sky dish, of course the individual had to pay the contract without any TV to watch!

Isn't a wayleave only relevant if infrastructure is being deployed for the benefit of people other than the resident of the concerned property? E.g. if for some reason Openreach wanted to sink a chamber into my front garden they would need a wayleave agreement in place, but to just install FTTP they need permission from me to do it and that's that.

I've never heard of wayleave being required for installation to a single premise where it hasn't required work on other private property.

That's exactly what I was trying to drill down to JPM

I've only got as far as looking at Physical infrastructure access (PIA) with individual private landlords
Too much information leaves me confused.

But like you I would have thought a single residence, all that would be needed is phone call, or email asking for permission and it being granted.

And that for a block of Flats - or a situation where digging trenches to a new build estate or somewhere out of service area would require all the t crossed and I's dotted with an official Wayleave.

But I'm totally ignorant of this, and a lot of reading I'm doing is maybe old and no longer relevant.
Shrug

In reply to a post by TransmitThis:

But I'm totally ignorant of this, and a lot of reading I'm doing is maybe old and no longer relevant.

Did you tell them you were a tenant with a landlord at any point?

In reply to a post by jpm:

I've never heard of wayleave being required for installation to a single premise where it hasn't required work on other private property.

When the resident is not the owner, they are a tenant; and permission is required from the owner / landlord. Some organisations call this 'wayleave' even though it isn't the same, it is just permission!

Not initially Jchamier, it never came up in the "registering an interest"
I asked a few questions, then received a contract to sign.
(With a note about having a booking reserved for a few days time to do the install)
- which was either nice and thoughtful or a pressure tactic to get me to sign and return the contract

After reading if fully (yes I know) I realised that the landlord may have issues with a specific section

Our rights under the Communications Act 2003. By ordering and requesting installation of our Service, you
agree that the Quantum Fibre Broadband Network Equipment placed on your property with your permission
will remain, including the internal network termination point installed in your property, irrespective of whether
you or anyone who purchases your property takes Services from us. You should ensure that any future
purchaser of your property is made aware that the property is connected to our network and the location of
Quantum Fibre Broadband Network Equipment. If you are a tenant in the property, you confirm that you have
consent from the Freehold owner of the property and/or Landlord for the installation of the Quantum Fibre
Broadband Network Equipment.

I couldn't sign anything saying that I agree the equipment would stay in this property - after I move or it's sold - not as a tenant (maybe this is a generic contract)

Which is when I confirmed I was a tenant, and that, above points may need clarification - I also was awaiting permission from landlord as I had already asked them if I could have permission to install fiber to the home.
---

I guess Quantum's initial contact with someone interested in their service should be:
To ask if they are a tenant or a house owner - and then go from there.

I don't believe any tenant asking for FTTH from a provider would initially proffer that info unbidden
I know I was unaware at the time that it would even be relevant, thinking a small hole and a box is of no consequence.

In reply to a post by jchamier:

Some organisations call this 'wayleave' even though it isn't the same, it is just permission!

That's interesting, not entirely sure which is the case with me, but probably a legal Wayleave


The landlord has been kind enough to email Quantum and ask directly for wayleave, proposed works etc so we'll see how that resolves over the next few days.

Definitely not as easy as getting some FTTC over the copper - Or changing your Gas Supplier.

Edited by TransmitThis (Tue 16-Aug-22 23:40:40)

Agreed. I had to get permission years ago to have cable installed.

In reply to a post by jpm:

Isn't a wayleave only relevant if infrastructure is being deployed for the benefit of people other than the resident of the concerned property? E.g. if for some reason Openreach wanted to sink a chamber into my front garden they would need a wayleave agreement in place, but to just install FTTP they need permission from me to do it and that's that.

I've never heard of wayleave being required for installation to a single premise where it hasn't required work on other private property.

Where the property occupier is not the owner of the property, tenant for example, technically then they’ll often need to provide evidence to the network that they have said owners / landlord permission to install. Even in single premises.

Here is an example of a simple “Access Agreement” one pager from VM

Openreach explanatory pages on permissions and wayleaves here.

In reply to a post by TransmitThis:

I couldn't sign anything saying that I agree the equipment would stay in this property - after I move or it's sold - not as a tenant (maybe this is a generic contract)

Well you should. The ONT is not yours to keep: it's part of the fibre provider's network, and will be used to provide service to subsequent occupiers.

You are only agreeing that you won't take it yourself - not that you will enforce this condition on the landlord or subsequent tenants.

Maybe I misread / misunderstood that then?

As you say... I was literally thinking that they were making me personally liable to enforce this condition on subsequent tenants or new owners.
Thanks for the reality check on my perspective of that.

The way it is worded definitely confused me if that indeed is the meaning.

Shouldn't these conditions be part of the Wayleave agreement with the Landlord.
They are giving access rights, and the line and termination box are going to stay with the property.

Anyway kind of moot till we even see if Quantum want to get a wayleave organised.

That VM one is a lot simpler than some I have seen, esp from law firms.

Yes that Openreach page is actually useful.

I'm still unsure if Quantum use the "Openreach network"
Or if they one of the few who use their own cables.

Will have to find that out - as I think I read that Openreach backend enables you to easily switch to another providers, whereas Virgin Media and others would limit you to themselves.

In reply to a post by TransmitThis:

I'm still unsure if Quantum use the "Openreach network"
Or if they one of the few who use their own cables.

Believe they are a standalone infrastructure provider (aka altnet), they may use Openreach poles and ducts to run their cable to your property but from a delivery of service Openreach are not involved so any wayleave/permission would be between landlord and Quantum (not Openreach).

Yes I found a link saying it's "Quantum network" and I see they have their own vans.
Can't find the link now.

Anyway, I wonder if that was also a bit of the confusion?

Landlord, Did say in one email

I am sure that Quantum have an arrangement with Openreach to make the necessary connections and look forward to receiving their request.

So Landlord was expecting a fully formed request from Openreach with the wayleave, supporting plans and details of the work involved As they probably have had from everyone else.

And what they got was me saying I want FTTH from Quantum and it's just a hole in the wall.
and Quantum saying yes we'll just run our cable from the pole and pop a box on the wall.

Maybe got the landlords back up?

In reply to a post by TransmitThis:

So Landlord was expecting a fully formed request from Openreach with the wayleave, supporting plans and details of the work involved As they probably have had from everyone else.

Landlord needs to read up that the UK Government has licensed quite a few companies under the Telecommunications Act to install infrastructure, Openreach (formerly BT) is one of many, where Virgin Media, and CityFibre are probably the 2nd and 3rd largest, but there are a lot of much smaller alternative networks deploying FTTP/FTTH.

My town is being slowly provisioned by Toob, and I may have to go through this process myself (if they ever appear in my part of town).

Perhaps a phone call and chat with your landlord would clear the mud?

In reply to a post by TransmitThis:

Yes I found a link saying it's "Quantum network" and I see they have their own vans.
Can't find the link now.

Anyway, I wonder if that was also a bit of the confusion?

Landlord, Did say in one email

I am sure that Quantum have an arrangement with Openreach to make the necessary connections and look forward to receiving their request.

So Landlord was expecting a fully formed request from Openreach with the wayleave, supporting plans and details of the work involved As they probably have had from everyone else.

And what they got was me saying I want FTTH from Quantum and it's just a hole in the wall.
and Quantum saying yes we'll just run our cable from the pole and pop a box on the wall.

Maybe got the landlords back up?

Hmmm. Is this the actual landlord or property management company?

I don’t think they’re at all clear on the scope of work.

Are you actually clear on the scope of work or do you need this detail from Quantum fibre (together with a simple plan of the cable pathway) to satiate the owner?

It won’t be an Openreach drop cable from the street or ONT as said. So get that knocked on the head.

I don't want to dox myself anymore than already done - so I use landlord as the generic term for the Housing Association they are "the landlord" the company the point of contact, the owners etc .

Scope,
Landlord and Myself have this from Quantum regarding the Planned works..

We would be following the route your Bt Cable is currently coming in. As far as I am aware your property is currently fed overhead to your property so we would pull our fibre line alongside the current Bt line to your property. Once at your property all we would need to do is drill a small hole through an external wall into your property to mount a small box the same size as your current Bt box on the wall.
We have never had to arrange for a wayleave agreement for any of our installations so I don't understand why they would require one . We have several installations fitted on xxx street which several are housing association properties and we haven't come across any issues like this before .
I hope this answers the questions you have asked but if you need any more information please let me know and i will try and answer the best i can .

Am I clear on it? - maybe. [They tie their cable to the bt line and drill a hole, put a box on the wall.]

Not sure the type of termination box or if it has battery backup / copper lines as emergency.
Just know it needs power and will be connected to their provided Fritz router.

Is the Landlord Clear? Well they read that, and replied with this;

Our legal department requires that any 3rd party who wishes to fit equipment in our properties must make a formal wayleave request to do so. As you have advised that you are intending to use existing BT or Openreach telephone cabling to do this we will also require confirmation from them that you have been given authorisation to do this.

Which is not really what Quantum said - regarding the cabling, so who knows? - I hope they are talking behind my back, maybe Quantum gave them a ring for a chat.

Not entirely sure what you meant here Pheasant

In reply to a post by Pheasant:

It won’t be an Openreach drop cable from the street or ONT as said. So get that knocked on the head.

Edited by TransmitThis (Wed 17-Aug-22 16:43:52)

I do wonder what the 'landlord' thinks has happened at the other addresses similar to your's if they know at all. You are trying to do this the correct way but others don't. I'm not sure exactly who the buck stops with if it all turns to poo further down the line regarding those other addresses.

In reply to a post by TransmitThis:

As you have advised that you are intending to use existing BT or Openreach telephone cabling to do this we will also require confirmation from them that you have been given authorisation to do this.

No, that is not the case.

Quantum is making using of the Openreach Passive Infrastructure Access product. This means they are paying to use the Openreach pole, but will not use any existing Openreach cables. A new cable will be laid alongside the Openreach one.

Probably best all in all if the landlord talks directly to Quantum. Quantum can then provide them with a copy of their telecom operators licence, or any other information that the landlord requires to satisfy themselves that they are genuine.

Not entirely sure what you meant here Pheasant

What I meant is that your housing association is under the misapprehension that QAF will use the existing BT Openreach cabling coming into the property.

They will not. They will run their own dedicated drop cable from the nearest serving pole to your premises, likely run down the wall from the eaves and then into a hole which they will drill to bring the cable through to the internal part of the property.

So this needs to be re-iterated to them so that they clearly understand and approve of this. Otherwise at some point down the track, end of tenancy etc they could turn around and ask you to remove it all and make it good.

I’d email both parties, and attach a marked up photo showing the location of the existing BT cabling, and where it is that you understand that the new cabling will be located - ditto on the internal wall where the ONT (fibre modem) will be located. If that’s not exactly correct then either of them can flag it up as an issue and hopefully it can be resolved without getting legal departments etc involved.

If you leave this up to them, it’s not likely to move at any pace, indeed might get buried, so if I were in your shoes (and I wanted this) then I’d drive it rather than leaving it.

As far as the landlord is concerned this is really no different to someone wanting to get Sky TV installed, except there's no satellite dish going up on the house. It's permission for a hole through the wall and an ONT to be fixed internally. There's no requirement of ongoing access or anything like that because the only time the equipment would need to be accessed is if whoever is living there requests it.

Obviously the landlord is perfectly at liberty to refuse whoever they want from installing equipment on their property, however it could be what the landlord is calling a wayleave is actually a method statement, basically the landlord wants the company intending to work on their property to outline the way they intend to provide service , what mitigation they have in place to ensure they don’t damage the property and potentially what procedures they employ if things do go wrong ( like if they drill through a water pipe ) it’s not unreasonable for the landlord to want something in writing before the work starts.
Many Alt Nets as a part of your contract with them , require that their equipment is kept serviceable even if you stop being a customer ,with a private property this means that should the property be sold the new owner cannot remove the cable and ONT , even if they have no intention of ever using that company, obviously with you being a tenant you are potentially giving the landlord an obligation they may not want.
I dare say some tenants don’t bother with the fine print of their rental agreement and just order service and the Telco assumes the tenant has obtained the necessary agreement and installs the service, both in blissful ignorance
If this Alt Net uses PIA then they have equipment on the Openreach pole ( you stated it’s an overhead area ) but as far as you , the Alt Net and your landlord , this has absolutely nothing to do with Openreach, they shouldn’t touch the existing Openreach dropwire

Edited by Iniltous (Wed 17-Aug-22 19:09:08)

In reply to a post by jpm:

There's no requirement of ongoing access or anything like that because the only time the equipment would need to be accessed is if whoever is living there requests it.

I'm inclined to agree with you.

In reply to a post by Iniltous:

, obviously with you being a tenant you are potentially giving the landlord an obligation they may not want.

My thoughts exactly when being sent the contract.

----------------------------------------

In reply to a post by Iniltous:

, this has absolutely nothing to do with Openreach, they shouldn’t touch the existing Openreach dropwire

Not totally sure on this nuance Iniltous, I think they would run their cable along the same path from the telegraph pole to the property, So would wrap it around - or attach it in some way to that copper cable - just as a means to keep things tidy and secured.

Could be wrong - they may run it adjacent and totally separate.
Anyone know?

----------------------------------

Is this what these box's look like
Are we talking a Junction Box on the outside and small Optical Network Terminal Box (ONT) inside?

As this is all a little new to me, just watched another vid. zen&openreach Don't recommend you watch it as it's cringe all the way
and only gets worse

Screengrab from Vid So they did use the larger box's with batteries - then smaller ones, and now pretty tiny ones, the one on the wall.

So if my old brain is right, it's comes from the PON (Passive Optical Network at the Exchange Via the local cabinets to som underground splitters to the CBT (Connectorised Block Terminal) on the Telegraph / utility pole along a dropwire (probably their own) to a termination CSP (Customer Service Point) on the outside of the building.

They do love their acronyms

Then inside its plugged into a ONT (Optical Network Terminal) on the wall, which is plugged into mains power and a router (Not sure if it's optical going into the router or Rj45 as never seen a fiber router)
Finally whatever you like from there, wireless or networked from the router.


I'm guessing that's the general state of things now.

In reply to a post by TransmitThis:

So if my old brain is right, it's comes from the PON (Passive Optical Network at the Exchange Via the local cabinets

Almost.

PON is the general term for the whole network end to end. The device at the exchange which drives the fibre is called the Optical Line Termination (OLT).

When you're talking about the Openreach FTTP network, cabinets are not involved at all (*). Instead, the fibre goes via Fibre Aggregation Nodes, which are almost always underground. (FTTC cabinets do get their upstream connectivity via the same Fibre Aggregation Nodes though. But one day, when the copper network is retired, the FTTC cabinets can be removed)

It's RJ45 between the ONT and the router: the router just needs an ethernet WAN port.

Altnets use a variety of architectures. Some of them use passive street cabinets, where the splitters are located, and some use active street cabinets containing OLTs.

(*) Except for a few ultra-remote locations, where there is a "subtended headend" - a small remote OLT sat inside a cabinet.

Edited by candlerb (Wed 17-Aug-22 21:36:24)

In reply to a post by candlerb:

In reply to a post by TransmitThis:

So if my old brain is right, it's comes from the PON (Passive Optical Network at the Exchange Via the local cabinets

Almost.

PON is the general term for the whole network end to end. The device at the exchange which drives the fibre is called the Optical Line Termination (OLT).

When you're talking about the Openreach FTTP network, cabinets are not involved at all (*). Instead, the fibre goes via Fibre Aggregation Nodes, which are almost always underground. (FTTC cabinets do get their upstream connectivity via the same Fibre Aggregation Nodes though. But one day, when the copper network is retired, the FTTC cabinets can be removed)

It's RJ45 between the ONT and the router: the router just needs an ethernet WAN port.

Altnets use a variety of architectures. Some of them use passive street cabinets, where the splitters are location, and some use active street cabinets containing OLTs.

(*) Except for a few ultra-remote locations, where there is a "subtended headend" - a small remote OLT sat inside a cabinet.

Ah the classic subtended headend disclaimer - missed these

Housing Associations and even Factors are a pain to get agreement from. Here in a block of flats that's privately owned and where the common areas are equally owned by the owners of each flat I still had to try and get agreement via the factors (the company who maintains the common areas on the group owners behalf) as the AltNet required to install their external network equipment in the common areas. E.g Fibre Distribution Point, ducting and a customer connection point just outside each flats door.

The factors legal team kept saying something different each time but as the building wasn't actually owned by them I was able to sign a wayleave myself with another owner of one of the flats. However the wayleave was needed in this example as they needed to install equipment in the common area. In the case of a tenant wanting to order a full fibre connection it should just be the case of asking the owner for permission for the ONT to be installed with maybe some drilling to bring in the fibre cable to it.

In any case anyway there's some legislation that was and may have already come in that basically allows fibre broadband infrastructure companies to be able to perform the installation and deployment even if there's a refusal. It use to be if there was a wayleave refusal the owner could be taken to court by the infrastructure provider to then be granted to install their equipment.

Also full fibre will in the next few years become the main primary broadband technology and you will only be able to get that type of fixed line broadband connection. Maybe worth letting your landlord know that they will at some point have to get full fibre installed anyway.

In any case anyway there's some legislation that was and may have already come in that basically allows fibre broadband infrastructure companies to be able to perform the installation and deployment even if there's a refusal.

If you mean the Telecommunications Infrastructure (Leasehold Property) Act 2021 then no it doesn’t give operators carte blanche, but tackles unresponsive landlords / property owners etc.

They can still refuse permission.

So would wrap it around - or attach it in some way to that copper cable - just as a means to keep things tidy and secured.

They almost certainly won’t wrap or in any way touch or interfere with the existing drop cable(s). It will be run separately and won’t touch or otherwise be attached.

In reply to a post by candlerb:

Almost. ...continues on, to lay down the knowledge.

Nice pose candlerb, I do like to go technical when I have the time.

So If it's rj45 from the ONT I guess that's because routers are pretty [censored], I mean they are not up to doing any real conversions of optical.
(I know my 3490 has a usb3 port for example, but throughput is usb2 speeds due to the limited processor used in that router)

The ONT dose the conversion and pumps out a nice clean signal that won't tax the router too much. Make sense.

Thanks for that reminder of possible directions to take things should it get hairy cymru123,
I don't think the landlord is intentionally being resistance to collaboration.
I'll be contacting them both again soon to see how we proceed.

Glad you eventually got yours sorted, that sound like all sorts of pain.

How would that work, er physically then.

I know copper wire has a thick outer coating, and they wrap wire around both ends and part way along the cable to secure to the pole and house.

But with a fiber, glass cable, even jacketed can you do the same?

Sorry showing my ignorance here.

The ONT that Quantum install is I believe made by HALNy. There is no battery backup (nor have there been any with Openreach installs for that matter for the last 3 or so years).

The basic architecture is PON, however things like exchanges, CBTs etc are very much BT Openreach intrinsic or ways that they execute their network / build

What you see in those videos doesn’t necessarily apply to AltNets like Quantum, who effectively build a completely parallel distribution network. They perhaps rent Openreach poles and ducts using PIA physical infrastructure access) and possibly rent some exchange space, but otherwise they are separate beasts.

The fibre is incredibly thin, like a human hair (maybe!) The surrounding thick plastic sheath and strengthening is extremely strong so as durable as an old copper cable and sheath, maybe even stronger.

Both aerial and underground fibre cables are heavily protected and have intrinsic Kevlar strength members for tensile loading. They can easily span 50+ metres and withstand all the usual UV and environmental rigours for decades. They don’t need other cables for support etc.

In reply to a post by TransmitThis:

So If it's rj45 from the ONT I guess that's because routers are pretty [censored], I mean they are not up to doing any real conversions of optical.

That's not really the reason, although cost does come into it.

Partly it's because ethernet over copper at 1G, 2.5G or 10G is guaranteed to work over the short distances required, so there's no reason to use fibre. Cat5e/Cat6 is easy to handle and it's safe (no going blind from peering into the unplugged connector!)

At the end of the day, the router is a piece of electronics, i.e. it uses voltages and copper wires internally.

Even those routers which *can* connect to fibre, generally do so using a plugin module called an SFP or SFP+ which is a kind of adapter. It has little copper pins which go into a port on the router, and fibre connectors on the outside. So you'd be converting from electrical to fibre and back again at the other end.

A few altnets use integrated routers which can connect directly to the incoming PON fibre. Even they generally use an SFP. It saves having two boxes (ONT+router) but then you lose the flexibility of being able to choose your own router.

Has to be said this forum is a wealth of useful information and I have to thank everyone who has posted so far.
And those who post in the future, in case I forget.

It's very much appreciated.

I think "wayleave" is the wrong word in this instance.

A wayleave is an agreement, by the landowner/property owner, to allow a 3rd party onto land or property to access/fix a bit of kit.

I believe a pheasant chap on here already alluded to the different ways wayleave is used, sometimes as a catchall.

Even going by your own post though, it's relevant, as they have termination box's inside and out, that they would need access to install as well as upgrade or maintain.

In reply to a post by TransmitThis:

I believe a pheasant chap on here already alluded to the different ways wayleave is used, sometimes as a catchall.

Even going by your own post though, it's relevant, as they have termination box's inside and out, that they would need access to install as well as upgrade or maintain.

A simple permission form is sufficient.

A wayleave isn't required when the kit being installed is only what will provide your own service.

Wayleaves cover much more and almost always include a payment, either annually or a 1 off, to the land owner for allowing regular access. That just isn't a requirement.
A wayleave also legally binds any future land/property owner to the same access agreement.

Regular access just isn't required. A 1 off visit to install the drop wire and ONT is sufficient, as happens with every home owner in the country who orders a full fibre service.
If the landlord refused future access it would only affect their own/their tenants service.

A wayleave for a domestic broadband installation is akin to using a sledgehammer to crack a nut.

Preaching to the choir here John,
My personal feelings are that (despite the types of wayleave and ambiguity there) it shouldn't be this difficult for a tenant to sign a contract and get FTTP installed - especially considering the current gov incentives and regulations.

But here we are... hrug:

In the good old days GPO/BT would fit a cable from a pole to a phone socket in the house. This socket was and still is the property of BT even though it is inside a building and no wayleave required. BT couldn't just come and check the socket out. With a wayleave and notice they can.

As a tenant anything that alters a property, they are renting, always requires the owner's/landlord's/management company's permission and that is where there are issues.

In reply to a post by broadband66:

As a tenant anything that alters a property, they are renting, always requires the owner's/landlord's/management company's permission and that is where there are issues.

Similar in leasehold, if anything affects the landlords half of the shared property.

Over a week since my landlord contacted them,
and I've sent three emails since then.

Yep no contact at all, not even an auto reply.


Can it be so difficult to download a 1 page wayleave agreement change it to suit and use it in these cases?

I literally have no idea why a professional business would not either say
"No sorry can't do this" or "Yes we are on the case"

So maybe something else is gong on.

Their last email 2 weeks ago... still telling me they didn't know how long or the cost of getting a wayleave, and they think it may have to come from openreach.

I just can't anymore. I'm going with another provider

Maybe Giganet, Vodafone or Talktalk (I believe use the BT Wholesale network)

Landlord will obviously still need wayleave etc - so will post again on how that goes

Landlord will obviously still need wayleave etc - so will post again on how that goes smile

Yeh you'll still need to get the landlord's permission for OR to run a new cable down the wall, mount a CSP and drill hole and install the ONT internally. Just as it would have been needed for QAF...

Perhaps your landlord's agent will be more at ease / accommodating knowing its an Openreach install (for whatever reasoning).