As we continue to emerge from lockdown measures and deal with local measures and the short and long term economic impact of Covid-19, local authorities will need to re-assess how services will be delivered for years to come.
Due to their nature, this makes fire stations, hospital buildings and tower accommodation highly desirable locations for the installation of telecommunication equipment. However, whilst the commercial attractiveness of an additional income stream is obvious, potential landlords should take care when entering into agreements without fully appreciating the consequences.
One of the main concerns for landlords when entering into telecommunication agreements is whether they will be able to recover the land during the term or when the agreement expires.
The Electronic Communication Code
The Electronic Communication Code (the "Code"), introduced by the Telecommunication Act 1984 (as amended by Schedule 3 to the Communications Act 2003) (the "Act"), imposes a form of statutory protection which can make it difficult for landlords to require, during or on the expiry of a term, the removal of any telecommunication equipment unless the tenant agrees.
In addition, the tenant might also benefit from protection under Part II of the Landlord and Tenant Act 1954 (the “LTA 1954”). Whilst many landlords are awake to the potential benefits of contracting out of the LTA 1954, they fail to take into account the additional protection offered by the Code.
Paragraphs 20 and 21 of the Code provide a form of security of tenure, which operates in addition to the security of tenure provisions of the LTA 1954, and limits the circumstances that will enable a landlord to seek to regain possession.
Unlike the LTA 1954, there are no special procedures allowing parties to contract out of paragraphs 20 and 21. The lack of a specific procedure causes ambiguity and in fact the Code specifies that attempts to contract out of paragraph 21 will be ineffective.
Paragraph 20 applies where a person with an interest in the land requires alteration (which includes moving, removing and replacing) of the telecommunications equipment to enable proposed improvement of the land. Whereby paragraph 21 applies where a person is entitled to require the removal of any of the operator’s equipment i.e the term of the agreement has expired, forfeiture, lift and shift provisions etc.
Both paragraphs 20 and 21 of the Code contain detailed provisions for service of notices and counter notices. Care should be taken in serving these notices as technical issues can arise as to which is the appropriate notice to serve.
Landlords who are either considering becoming, or are already, party to telecommunication agreements need to assess and fully appreciate their position. Whilst it is possible to mitigate risk, landlords need to appreciate that regaining possession of land is far from straight forward.
Consideration needs to be given when negotiating the terms of these agreements as to the benefits of contracting out of the LTA 1954 and also the wording of any clauses that seek to exclude or limit the provisions of the Code as not all exclusions clauses will be valid. The wording and scope of the exclusion clause will be key!
If landowners are currently reviewing their agreements with the view to seeking vacant possession, care needs to be taken to ensure the correct notice is given and that consideration is given to the fact that a landowner may have to resort to Court proceedings to recover possession. If the agreement also benefits from security under the LTA 1954, this will create another level of complexity that will require careful consideration and management.
For more information
The Government first announced plans for a shared ownership right to buy in October 2019. At the time the sector raised concerns about the impact the plans would have on housing associations ability to borrow. An election and a pandemic later the Government announced, during the CIH Housing Festival last week, the return of the right to shared ownership as part of its Affordable Homes Programme (AHP).
Two final pieces of the possession jigsaw have been published on 15 September 2020. Mr Justice Knowles’ working group on possession proceedings has issued its guidance on the “overall arrangements” for possession proceedings.
One change proposed by the Building Safety Bill is the introduction of a duty holder regime, which will see statutory responsibility for the safety of higher risk buildings placed on key individuals
Throughout this pandemic, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has been publishing various “Statements on Coronavirus” (Statements) which provide guidance on consumer rights during this time.
A recent increase in COVID-19 cases in the UK means new measures are being put in place in an effort to reduce the risk of a second wave. Whilst the impact of COVID-19 continues to be felt, it is important to remain focused on the sector’s road to recovery.
Sometimes half an hour at a conference gives you the reality that has been staring you in the face all along. That was my experience watching “Change is on the Horizon”
Following our recent e-briefing on Possession Notices, Helen Tucker and Emilie Pownall from our housing litigation team discuss the impact of the changes on social landlords.
Not only has the possession stay been extended until 20 September, the notice periods to be given to tenants has been extended in certain circumstances with some important exceptions.
The Court has confirmed that a party cannot withhold its consent in order to re-write the original bargain.
To receive invitations to our events, as well as information and articles on legal issues and sector developments that are of interest to you, please sign up to Newsroom.