OR FTTP live, how long before I can order?

Hi. Openreach FTTP has been live to me for 2 weeks now, as confirmed by a UPRN search on DSL checker. It’s not coming up as available to order from any ISPs yet though. I’m guessing it takes some time for them to update their availability database. Does anyone know how long this usually takes? Can’t wait to get away from VM! Cheers.

In reply to a post by derby13:

Hi. Openreach FTTP has been live to me for 2 weeks now, as confirmed by a UPRN search on DSL checker. It’s not coming up as available to order from any ISPs yet though. I’m guessing it takes some time for them to update their availability database. Does anyone know how long this usually takes? Can’t wait to get away from VM! Cheers.

try the sky, zen and btwholesale checkers.

As for how long, depends on when the cable links are activated at the headexchange.

By "DSL checker" do you mean broadbandchecker.btwholesale.com ?

If it shows available there, then in principle *any* ISP that uses BT wholesale should be able to order it.

If not, then there might be a problem with matching your address. Are you able to search by postcode and house number, rather than UPRN?

Also, phone your chosen ISP and ask them to check.

Ah it’s showing available with Zen, which is the only one that it does. Thanks. I’ll give them a try.

In reply to a post by derby13:

Ah it’s showing available with Zen, which is the only one that it does. Thanks. I’ll give them a try.

Be careful - exactly what is the "it" Zen is showing?
OR FTTP became available at my address about a month ago. But Zen won't offer it to me - because Trooli is also available, they will only offer service over Trooli. Zen's website doesn't make this at all clear.

Not quite what you asked but we have had a live Freedom Fibre Network in our Close for 3 years. It is still not available for orders even though there is an existing OpenReach Network which was RFS 4 years ago.

When I asked Freedom Fibre to explain the delay, I was told that it was legal and they needed the site developer's permission to access the Final Drop to each property ( an existing underground pipe that runs from the pavement chamber to adjacent properties) and OpenReach has a bigger legal department than they have. I am not expecting Freedom Fibre RFS anytime soon.

Developers install (and are paid for doing so ) Openreach duct and jointboxes on behalf of Openreach, it’s not or never was the developers property , it is and remains Openreach property so if this Alt Net has arranged to use PIA , then the developer has no reason to stop them doing so , what this Alt Net have told you complete and utter nonsense., if you chose to believe it , is entirely up to you .
If the developer has denied this Alt Net access to the site in general (not specifically Openreach ducts, including what you call the final drop ) this has nothing to do with Openreach duct ownership , but this is probably not the case either , chances are they simply regarded you as a ‘busy body’ and just told you what you wanted to hear which you naively accept and disseminate as ‘fact’ .
If you want to use this Alt Net , but you are not expecting them to be ready for service any time soon, whatever the real reason for this delay is , it’s got nothing to do with Openreach, irrespective of the size of their legal department.
If this development is 4 years old , then it’s likely the roads and footpaths are now adopted by the local authority, in which case the developers have no way to refuse the Alt Net on any basis

Edited by Iniltous (Tue 14-Jul-26 14:23:01)

Yes and no.

Openreach's legal right to cross private land (like an unadopted road or pavement owned by developer) is non-transferable.

It follows that Freedom Fibre must legally get a Wayleave from my developer for the final drop to my property (all 2 feet of it).

I've always been surprised by the amount of incorrect information given out to customers by some telecoms companies (and where applicable their contractors as well), I don't know if their staff are simply misinformed or if its intentional so to deflect from themselves. I always fact check what they say just so I get the true story.

Openreach's legal right to cross private land (like an unadopted road or pavement owned by developer) is non-transferable.
What ?, the Alt Net may need permission from the developer to be on site like any contractor while pulling in cables etc while the development is ongoing (before adoption by the local authority) but they can’t issue wayleaves to access Openreach property , what do you think is non transferable, OR don’t transfer the wayleave, PIA gives them rights to access ….being on a new development doesn’t change this , it certainly doesn’t need a second sign off by the developer.

It follows that Freedom Fibre must legally get a Wayleave from my developer for the final drop to my property (all 2 feet of it).
No it doesn’t , you really have no clue, if FF are not ready for service, they are obviously not telling you the real reason why , and the excuse they gave you doesn’t bare scrutiny .

Edited by Iniltous (Tue 14-Jul-26 14:48:48)

There really is no need to be so rude.

I have spoken to 3 ISPs (Aquiss; IdNet and Zen). They in turn have spoken to their Freedom Fibre wholesaler VeraServ. VeraServ has spoken to Freedom Fibre who sent out a surveyor.

He confirmed to me in person that the network is live and has been for the past 3 years. He checked the Final Drop and said he was happy to release my Close as RFS.

A week later I heard back from Freedom Fibre that they had to been advised by their legal team that as the pavements are unadopted a Wayleave IS required.

As I am not legally qualified, I am not in a position to argue with Freedom Fibre’s legal team. FWIW, what Freedom Fibre is telling me is confirmed by two AI searches:

‘Your house is on a development where the roads are still awaiting local authority adoption. This is one of the most common reasons. Even if utilities are already present, Freedom Fibre still needs legal permission from whoever owns the road (often the developer) to install or maintain its own infrastructure.’

By all means vent at them.

Edited by GoWest (Tue 14-Jul-26 15:02:52)

I’ve no need to vent at anyone, especially FF , as I’ve no need for their services.

To deconstruct the AI search returned to you , I don’t know why you quote AI nonsense, but anyway,

Your house is on a development where the roads are still awaiting local authority adoption. ( This may well be true )

This is one of the most common reasons. (Common reason for what ? )

Even if utilities are already present, Freedom Fibre still needs legal permission from whoever owns the road (often the developer) to install or maintain its own infrastructure.’ (True ,but typically AI doesn’t differentiate between physical infrastructure like ducts and boxes and cabling , they don’t need a wayleave from the developers to put FF cables inside Openreach duct and boxes , PIA allows them to use Openreach assets, of course if they need to construct some of their own physical infrastructure to link into the existing Openreach infrastructure, they clearly they need permission from the developers for that , but that has nothing to do with Openreach , the developer has no right or reason to stop the Alt Net from using Openreach infrastructure which is what you imply, they do have an interest if the Alt Net want to start excavating ).

You suggest that the developer has stopped the Alt Net from using Openreach infrastructure, (the crack about the OR legal department) when the developer has no ownership of OR infrastructure , and no reason to involve itself in the PIA arrangements, between OR and FF , the developers can’t issue wayleaves for Openreach infrastructure , they have no legal ownership of it , and have no reason to deny the Alt Net access to it .

You imply that Openreach’s legal department is somehow responsible without any evidence that they are somehow delaying FF , yet FF told you they were RFS , then no availability is forthcoming, this has nothing to do with Openreach , and if FF need to obtain wayleaves themselves for additional physical infrastructure, (not the FF cabling inside Openreach ducts etc ) then they clearly are not ready at all .

You may think I’m rude , I think you you are potentially libellous

Edited by Iniltous (Tue 14-Jul-26 15:43:16)

What gives you the right to sound off in the way that you are doing when all I am doing is relaying back to you what I have been told by Freedom Fibre in a number of emails?

‘ The survey has been completed but we're unable to release this to order yet. The engineer found that the street is owned by xxxxx Homes, a building developer, who we will need to make contact with to confirm any wayleave charges. ‘

All AI is doing is confirming what I am being told by Freedom Fibre.

‘ In your case

Based on what you’ve told me before:

* your property is on a 2018 development,
* the roads are still not adopted, and
* you already have Openreach FTTP.

The most likely explanation is that Freedom Fibre needs permission from the owner of the estate roads (which you previously said is XXXX Homes) to install their own network, even if Openreach already serves your house.

Let’s leave it there.

So what exactly do Openreach , and the Openreach legal department have to do with this , your clear implication was that OR were stopping FF from delivering by influencing the developers into not issuing a wayleave , when OR have no involvement at all , if FF need a wayleave its not to use Openreach assets, if FF don’t want to use any Openreach infrastructure under PIA and don’t want to install anything at all , including cabling in OR infrastructure or excavating for duct / boxes etc of their own , if the roads are not adopted , then why did they declare the area RFS when it clearly isn’t .

I suppose this all revolves around who said ‘OpenReach has a bigger legal department than they have’ and what the subtext is , Openreach are not responsible for this Alt Net teasing you into thinking they can provide you with services then letting you down, if FF said this , with a ‘wink’ suggesting legal muscle they can’t compete with , they were lying to you , if they never mentioned Openreach but you thought that’s what they meant , you were wrong and wrong to post it

Edited by Iniltous (Tue 14-Jul-26 16:40:53)

I had Plusnet FTTC, when Plusnet FTTP was installed it worked immediately. I was pleased to find that I still had my fixed IP address which I paid £10 for some years ago. (IIRC)

It was a simple comment from a Freedom Fibre surveyor to say that, compared to OpenReach, Freedom Fibre’s legal department has become very defensive when it comes to approving new connections. I think that he was telling me not to expect a connection anytime soon. He worked previously for OpenReach and he was the Team Lead for the existing OpenReach network in my Close.

I suspect that the surveyor’s comment has something to do with this Employment Tribunal:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/68235...

As reported by ISPreview:

‘The former Chief Technology Officer (CTO) of Freedom Fibre, Shawn Nolan, was awarded £105,500 by an Employment Tribunal for unfair dismissal and whistleblowing. The tribunal found that the company made him redundant after he repeatedly warned management that engineers were routinely trespassing on private land to install fibre without consent.’

A month on I have yet to hear anything back from Freedom Fibre on whether they will ever progress an order.. The surveyor was right in his assessment.

My point in posting is that the OP asked how long would it take before he could place an order? So far with Freedom Fibre it is nearly 4 years!

And yet , supposedly there is FF network nearby , you have an Openreach duct from an Openreach jointbox in the footpath all the way to your house wall , this box is linked to other Openreach jointboxes ‘off site’ …if you ordered FF clearly you wouldn’t complain of trespassing in your garden , or if they fitted FF equipment on your house wall (the developer no longer has no interest in your house wall or garden ) , OR PIA allows them to cable through the existing Openreach boxes and ducts to your house (no extra wayleave needed) , especially not from the developer as it’s not their duct or boxes in the first place , yet FF are nervous (apparently ) about not having a wayleave they don’t need , and getting permission to pull in (potentially few hundred metres of cable but likely much less ) into Openreach ducts and boxes when this doesn’t need a wayleave, and after 4 years doesn’t even need a courtesy visit to the developer site office to say ‘Hi we are working in the footpath, do we need a site induction ( needed if it were still a building site but after 4 years it isn’t ) they have PPE and guarding equipment, so no issues , it really makes no sense why they walked away , but that was never the point , it was you bringing OR into it .

Edited by Iniltous (Tue 14-Jul-26 17:41:37)

In reply to a post by GoWest:

Freedom Fibre must legally get a Wayleave from my developer for the final drop to my property (all 2 feet of it).

This doesn't sound right if they are using PIA

In reply to a post by derby13:

Hi. Openreach FTTP has been live to me for 2 weeks now, as confirmed by a UPRN search on DSL checker. It’s not coming up as available to order from any ISPs yet though. I’m guessing it takes some time for them to update their availability database. Does anyone know how long this usually takes? Can’t wait to get away from VM! Cheers.

I'd give it a few weeks at least for databases etc to get updated. From a physical standpoint, cablelinks etc in the handover exchange being ready - BT Wholesale based service providers are typically, but not always, some of the first to show up in their portals as being able to order service.

Have fun. Good luck and report back when you are able to order/from whom.

In reply to a post by PCJM40:

In reply to a post by GoWest:

Freedom Fibre must legally get a Wayleave from my developer for the final drop to my property (all 2 feet of it).

This doesn't sound right if they are using PIA

There is some nuance and certain extenuating factors to consider, but here is Claude's conclusion:

"..provided certain conditions are met, the new/independent provider does not need a separate wayleave or landowner permission of its own. The legal mechanism that makes this possible is the "upgrading and sharing" right in paragraph 17 of Schedule 3A to the Communications Act 2003 (the Electronic Communications Code).

Here's how it works. Where an existing telecoms operator (say, Openreach) already holds Code rights or a wayleave to keep its ducts, poles or other apparatus on private land, paragraph 17 gives that operator a statutory right to share the use of that apparatus with another operator — which is exactly what happens under the regulated Physical Infrastructure Access (PIA) scheme — without having to go back to the landowner for fresh consent. This right applies automatically as long as two conditions are satisfied: the sharing has no adverse impact, or no more than a minimal adverse impact, on the appearance of the apparatus, and it imposes no additional burden on the landowner (meaning no additional adverse effect on their enjoyment of the land, and no additional loss, damage or expense to them). Crucially, any clause in the existing wayleave that tries to prohibit or restrict this kind of sharing is overridden and void to the extent it conflicts — a point reinforced by the Product Security and Telecommunications Infrastructure Act 2022, which extended this override to older "subsisting agreements" entered into before the 2017 Code came into force, closing a gap that had previously caused disputes where legacy wayleaves contained no-sharing clauses.

The practical effect for PIA specifically is that the incoming altnet or independent provider is not itself required to hold, or negotiate, a wayleave with the private landowner in order to install its own cable into the host operator's duct or attach equipment to the host operator's pole. It is the host operator (the one with the existing wayleave) that is exercising its own statutory right to share its apparatus; the new operator rides on that right.
That said, there are limits worth flagging. If enabling PIA access requires more than minimal visual change (for example, new visible cabinets, additional poles, or significant new cabling runs rather than simply pulling fibre through an existing duct or attaching a cable to an existing pole), or if it genuinely burdens the landowner more than the status quo, then paragraph 17 doesn't apply and separate landowner agreement — or, failing agreement, an application to the Tribunal under the Code's dispute procedure — would be needed. It also matters whether the existing arrangement is a genuine Code right/agreement (or a "subsisting agreement" caught by the 2022 amendment) rather than some other form of licence outside the Code altogether, since the paragraph 17 override is specifically tied to Code agreements. And this analysis covers the private-land legal permission question only; separately, the incoming operator will also need its own commercial/regulatory relationship with the host operator for the PIA product itself under Ofcom's wholesale access regime — that's a contractual matter between the operators and doesn't run through the landowner at all.

Given how fact-sensitive this can get — particularly around whether a given wayleave is a genuine Code agreement, whether it pre-dates the 2017 Code, and whether the specific installation works stay within the "minimal impact/no additional burden" threshold — this is worth checking against the specific wayleave and proposed works with a solicitor experienced in the Code if it's a live, consequential situation (e.g., a dispute with a landowner or a commercial project depending on the answer). I'm not a lawyer and this isn't legal advice.
Sources:

Paragraph 17, Schedule 3A, Communications Act 2003 - legislation.gov.uk
New UK telecommunications infrastructure law brings changes to the Electronic Communications Code - Osborne Clarke
Altnet PIA, the Framework and the PIA Coalition - Bratby Law
Ofcom: Code of practice concerning agreements for access to private land
Ofcom: Wholesale local access market review – duct and pole access remedies"

Then again it is just an AI so could be hallucinating the whole thing 😂