Wow - thank you all so much for the advice and the clear message is I should be OK - albeit with some very annoyed neighbours who were originally 'bulldozed' into signing up to the community scheme. I have checked all my paperwork upon house purchase and there is no mention of the scheme / estate charges payable. I have been advised that the whole estate did have FTTC running at 30Mbps available at the time the scheme was implemented, but a couple of home businesses on the local estate needed more capcity so it appears as though threats of decreases in house value and being 'unable to use the internet' were employed to encourage participation.

In terms of how I became aware, I was chatting to a neighbour going though the same exercise (an OpenReach van was outside their house) and they eventually paid up to keep peace with the neighbours. Can I 100% assume that there s no way that the community boradband installation contract could have been structured so that the local residents association have some kind of ongoing / residual economic interest / charge over the infrastructure.

The next consideration is how to get the installation completed without the neighbours noticing - what they wont know can't upset them!

In reply to a post by BBGiraffe:

The next consideration is how to get the installation completed without the neighbours noticing - what they wont know can't upset them!

Don't tell too many fibs which can be found out! If you know where to look...

ONT exists with active service. No spare ports are available. A new ONT may be ordered.

BBG - I would just go ahead and order it. If theres any costs to pay it's between you and your ISP/CP.

If someone want to lay claim that you owe them money now for a scheme was was constructed before you even owned your new house, then good luck to them proving it.

No one likes to tick off their neighbours, especially when you're newly arrived, but by the same token you shouldn't be bullied into paying something for which you have no legal obligation - unless they can prove otherwise.

For heavens sake don't go spending money on solicitors or any of that jazz.

I organised a CFP in 2018/19 with similar characteristics - a private estate, most residents of which wanted fibre and were prepared to pay for it, and some who weren't. At the request of the payers, I asked OR what the situation was with the the non-payers going forward. They were clear that there was a chance that free-loading would be an option for the non-payers. (Not a certainty, given constraints on capacity.)

Roll forward a year or two and our fibre went live. (In the end we didn't pay for it, as OR refunded our contribution.) And, sure enough, at least one neighbour who didn't want to join the CFP + pay now has fibre.

My advice (and I am not a lawyer) would be to have a careful look at the legal paperwork and see if you have rights to use the communal amenities of the estate. In particular, OR will - I imagine - need to pull fibre through pre-existing ducting into your house. I'd imagine you have the right to use such commonly held facilities. If so, just go ahead and order, and - if the neighbours complain - say they should take it up with OR.

Edited by deleted (Fri 29-Jan-21 10:00:10)

In reply to a post by BBGiraffe:

Can I 100% assume that there s no way that the community broadband installation contract could have been structured so that the local residents association have some kind of ongoing / residual economic interest / charge over the infrastructure.

I really don't believe so, I have discussed this with Openreach several times as every community fibre partnership I have come across have enabled extra non-contributing properties and I have always been told by Openreach there is nothing the contributing properties can do about it. If it was possible every community would be doing it.

In reply to a post by PianSomB:

they should take it up with OR.

+1

Thanks again for the reassurance - I think I'm going to move ahead and place the order. It has been a number of years since the community scheme completed and my neighbours have enjoyed the benefits of the faster connection during that time so I cant see there being to much of a problem beyond 'buyers remorse' for those that didn't need it - trying to recover their sunk costs form a new neighnout is not reasonable.

On the flip side, it does feel a little inequitable that a non pariticpant can freeload of a community or FTTP OD installation right away but the infrastructure is there, it is owned by OpenReach and thus I see no reeason not to make use of it. Perhaps for the future, a small one off connection charge could be levied by OpenReach to support the ongoing national roll out strategy in these types of scenarios.

To be totally honest, if you had been living there at the time it was installed and had refused to contribute and then had immediately ordered once it was available I would have had full sympathy for the local community who had contributed but your case is very different. Also I note no one here has posted in support of the residents assocation.

All the best and hope it doesn't sour the relationship with your new neighbours

Edited by deleted (Fri 29-Jan-21 11:28:27)

In reply to a post by BBGiraffe:

... trying to recover their sunk costs form a new neighbour is not reasonable.

I think that sentence sums it up perfectly. Both legally *and* ethically/morally. As the new neighbour you had no idea that you would be expected to "cough up" cash and nor should you have to.

In reply to a post by BBGiraffe:

On the flip side, it does feel a little inequitable that a non pariticpant can freeload of a community or FTTP OD installation right away but the infrastructure is there, it is owned by OpenReach and thus I see no reeason not to make use of it. Perhaps for the future, a small one off connection charge could be levied by OpenReach to support the ongoing national roll out strategy in these types of scenarios.

I really wouldn't beat yourself up about that. As I said earlier both my neighbours theoretically can get notionally 'free' FTTP should they so desire. If they did would I be so bold as to knock on their front door demanding 50% or 33% of what it cost me to get the fibre here. Of course not! I think that is morally bankrupt and only the "Victor Meldrew's" of this country would countenance let alone pursue that line of thought.

To add to all of this....

The CFP or FTTPod will of benefited from what Openreach defines as 'Properties Past' which gives the organisers a discount from Openreach on the total project cost if they can enable another property that hasn't signed up to be part of the agreement, but falls within the infrastructure.

So in fact, it is they that should be greatful!