Telecoms windfalls come with long-term consequences for landowners
Farmers and other landowners should give careful thought before leasing land to telecoms operators, despite the apparent windfall of income it could provide.
That is the message from Shropshire lawyer, Lynn Hobbs, of PCB Solicitors, who cautions that the current law often favours the telecoms companies over landowners, with a presumption that the country's communications infrastructure takes top priority.
When telecoms firms identify sites where they would like to position a new mast and associated infrastructure and equipment, be this on currently empty land or the roof of a building, they approach the property owner with an offer to lease the space.
Mrs Hobbs explained: “Clients will often ring their legal or other advisors extremely excited at the prospect of earning unexpected income from granting a lease to a telecommunications operator. To keep their options open for possible redevelopment of the land in the future, a sophisticated client will say that the lease must exclude the tenant's statutory right to a renewal of the lease at the end of its term. Numerous leases have been granted to telecommunications operators on this basis and landlords have sat back and enjoyed what is often a very lucrative rent.”
But there is a sting in the tail of this arrangement. Mrs Hobbs added: “Landlords usually do not appreciate that telecommunications operators all too willingly agree to exclude their statutory right to renewal because they know the agreement is, to all intents and purposes, meaningless! At the end of a lease the telecoms operator can insist on a further lease regardless of the landlord's intentions for his land and regardless of an agreement to exclude the statutory right of renewal.
“Where a landlord wishes to redevelop land on which there is telecommunications equipment and a Court order has been granted for it to remain, unless he can accommodate the equipment within his development, the land is to all intents and purposes blighted. Compensation may be paid but how can this be quantified? How can a local authority trying to provide land to be developed for social housing be compensated in those circumstances? The Court decides on the level of compensation.”
Mrs Hobbs stressed that before entering into such an agreement, landowners need to decide whether the potential risk of having telecoms equipment on their land or building outweighs the benefits of the income that will be generated.
Anyone wishing to discuss the issue in more detail can contact Lynn Hobbs on 01743 248148.
