Shared Driveway Consenting Nightmare

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › Shared Driveway Consenting Nightmare - please help!

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | ... | 8

3344 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Vocus

#1256346 11-Mar-2015 14:34

WagtheDog: show some #8 wire ingenuity Chorus - I dare you!

I hear if you double-dog dare them then they will consider your case...

Wheelbarrow01

1725 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Chorus

#1256379 11-Mar-2015 15:29

My understanding is that even if Chorus could complete the fibre installation without disturbing the driveway in some manner, they must still gain the consent of all the owners just in case something goes wrong on the day. This then pre-authorises them to dig a hole in the middle of the driveway etc, if for example they lose a drill head or it goes off course and they need to redirect it. This saves a consent delay from happening after the job has started - or even worse saves a job from being cancelled mid flight if an owner refuses consent after work has begun.

I also understand that if you have already applied for fibre services, your consent is expressed by that application so you will most likely not be requested to fill in the consent form. What this means is that if one of your neighbours subsequently applies for fibre, Chorus will not need to expressly get your consent again, as they already have it in the form of your original application for fibre services.

Don't take either of these statements as absolute - it is just what experience has led me to believe, and I am sure there are instances where neither of these statements holds true. Unfortunately the 'science' of consent is not absolute, and every situation is different.

The views expressed by me are not necessarily those of my employer Chorus NZ Ltd

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#1256396 11-Mar-2015 15:42

It sounds like: -
- You don't need access to the property to do the work.
- There is a duct in place.

Would it kill you to send someone to verify these facts and speed the job along?
Is anyone really going to sue Chorus for blowing fibre down an existing copper duct?

I note for comparison that your Nelson UFB contractor dug up our front garden and installed an access hatch for multiple existing conduits, and no-one even told us it was happening. I actually don't mind and they did a considerate and tidy job but didn't have any legal entitlement to undertake those works on our private property.

Chorusnz: As you point out, you have a shared driveway that is subject to a cross lease.

That means that you do not have exclusive ownership nor exclusive use of the driveway. Any previous consent relating to the previous installation of copper services does not automatically confer consent to install a new fibre network ( it would make life easier if this was the case ).

Therefore in order that we can work in the driveway ( which is private property) Chorus and its contractors need written consent from all owners to enter the property & undertake the required work.

If you are in contact with the other owners then take a copy of the ROW consent form ( can be downloaded from our website), get them to complete & sign it and then email it to us on their behalf.

Once we have consent registered in our property database for all owners we can proceed with the provisioning work. Without consent it will not even start.

^GL

Mike

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1256409 11-Mar-2015 16:00

MikeAqua: Is anyone really going to sue Chorus for blowing fibre down an existing copper duct?

I note for comparison that your Nelson UFB contractor dug up our front garden and installed an access hatch for multiple existing conduits, and no-one even told us it was happening. I actually don't mind and they did a considerate and tidy job but didn't have any legal entitlement to undertake those works on our private property.

Not a lawyer, but in theory you might well be entitled to sue the Nelson UFB contractor for doing that work without your legal consent. You can't really blame Chorus or any other company for covering themselves from such legal liability by obtaining written consent from all concerned parties beforehand.

Whatifthespacekeyhadneverbeeninvented?

MikeAqua

7785 posts

Uber Geek

#1256433 11-Mar-2015 16:35

I'm not at all bothered by the access hatch.

I'm only mentioning it as an example I have personally experienced of Chorus (via their ) ignoring private property rights when it suits them to get a job done.

By that standard, the position being represented by Chorus on this particular thread is hard to swallow.

It isn't trespass to walk/drive up a shared driveway without permission from all owners. It if was you would need your neighbours permission for courier and pizza deliveries.

It would cost Chorus very little and expose them to no risk to send a tech round to the OP's place to check what work is required and establish what consents are needed. Instead the OP is left chasing consent that is difficult to obtain and may not actually be required.

I'm reminded of the farcical bureaucracy scenes in Jupiter Ascending.

Not a lawyer, but in theory you might well be entitled to sue the Nelson UFB contractor for doing that work without your legal consent. You can't really blame Chorus or any other company for covering themselves from such legal liability by obtaining written consent from all concerned parties beforehand.

Mike

richms

28189 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256442 11-Mar-2015 16:42

Perhaps if the govt did something useful to solve this insanity rather than messing around with press conferences about loony uncredible threats then UFB uptake wouldnt be embarrasingly low?

Richard rich.ms

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#1256472 11-Mar-2015 17:08

InstallerUFB:
surfisup1000: As far as i'm concerned the law needs a change.

Can your neighbours block electricity / phone or other essential services to your house?

So, why are they allowed to block UFB?

Actualy your neighbours can block the construction of any services to your property through theirs no mater what they are unless there is an existing/ or negotiated legal easement for that service. There is not likely to be existing concent/easments for the construction of the UFB newtork through private property.

That does not make sense though, because I bet the other services are approved when the property is converted to crosslease. By default, UFB is a communication service so should be automatically approved along with the telephone lines.

Either way, in the absence of common sense i believe a law change is needed. I've heard about cases like this before but I'm not sure how common it might be.

Quic Broadband

Move to New Zealand's best fibre broadband service (affiliate link). Free setup code: R587125ERQ6VE. Note that to use Quic Broadband you must be comfortable with configuring your own router.

Cbfd

307 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1256498 11-Mar-2015 17:28

Chorus need this approval from all users of the ROW due to the factor even though there might b an existing duct, it may b blocked or damaged thus when the contractors come along to haul ABF tube tube they can dig up and repair it while they are there

DarthKermit

5346 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1256507 11-Mar-2015 17:34

^^^

Good point. There's no guarantee that any existing duct or conduit can be re-used for a purpose like UFB until someone tries to shove the fibre up it. Murphy's Law...

Whatifthespacekeyhadneverbeeninvented?

richms

28189 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256517 11-Mar-2015 17:47

If the copper broke because of lightning or other damage, would they need approval to replace it with more copper? The answer is no, they dont.

So needing approval to replace it with a slightly different data carrying cable is IMO absurd. There is already all the easements inplace for a cable that carrys internet. Its not like they are adding a gas main or something.

Richard rich.ms

Cbfd

307 posts

Ultimate Geek

#1256521 11-Mar-2015 17:56

Its nothing to do with replacing it , its to do if they do need to dig up existing stuff to get it thru - also youll find the easement is for essential services which youllfind arent telecommunications

vroom

89 posts

Master Geek

#1256568 11-Mar-2015 19:33

http://prd-lgnz-nlb.prd.pco.net.nz/regulation/public/2002/0213/latest/DLM138595.html

Check your title, it should have a telecommunications easement for the ROW. And ask a lawyer.

Good luck.

froob

692 posts

Ultimate Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#1256571 11-Mar-2015 19:38

Can anyone shed some light on why Chorus are requiring this consent? Some of the explanations above don't really make sense... The OP's situation aside - most people with shared access are going to have some sort of right to run telecommunications down their shared driveway.

My house doesn't have a shared driveway, but it does have a stormwater drain that runs across several neighbouring properties. That includes the right for me and my contractors to go onto those properties and dig up the drains (which run under driveways) as long as I minimise disruption and make good the damage afterwards etc. Can't see how it would be any different for telecommunications rights on a shared driveway.

Guide: Installing Network Cabling in New Zealand Homes

Batman

Mad Scientist
29766 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256579 11-Mar-2015 19:59

WagtheDog: To add insult to injury, one of them has expressed interest to get connected and is MY consent required - of course not!

Chorus, all I am asking for is some lateral thinking in solving this issue - if you even issue the scoper, I can then take his/her report BACK to my neighbours for reassurance & reissue ROW consent, or approach the two sets of adjacent neighbours (both who are owner occupiers) to see if they would consent access through their properties, but you take ANY option for other solutions away but not letting the first step of the process take place.

I am not asking you to break the law - I am asking for you to help me work within the law to find a solution instead of having a very linear approach - show some #8 wire ingenuity Chorus - I dare you!

why is it that they do not need your consent?

Lorenceo

904 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#1256638 11-Mar-2015 21:37

Consent is assumed to already be granted from him, since he has already requested UFB at an address which shares the same driveway.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | ... | 8