I am prepared to agree to your solutions
I am told verbally by BT personell that the new min height for phone wiers crossing private land is 3.7 meters ( 12ft 2in ) that is private drive ways etc NOT Highways
I have since found this out from the GOOGLE webbsite
The latest authority that I can find is:-
The Electricity Safety, Quality and Continuity Regulations 2002
Over to you!!
what does this mean over to me?
All I want to know for sure the min height for phone wires crossing private land driveways etc
I've played an exposed hand. I am prepared to rely on that SI as My Authority.
You say that I am incorrect and thereefor (impliedly) that there is subsequent legislation which covers the point.
For all I (or you) know, BT have quoted to you some internal or in-house rules which go beyond the legal requirements. Your question was asked in the UK legal section of JA. Therefor you were asking the legal position and not the in-house, self-imposed one.
If I am wrong then surely it is reasonable to ask you to tell me why?
Hi Mike sorry for the delay with the reply but I was called out last night
Anyway I am not implying that you are wrong but clearly someone is wrong BT personnel say the new min height is now 3.7 meters off ground as apposed to the
old min height of 3 meters so you can see I am still none the wiser this is why i contacted JA have you tried the google website ? I would like to know the correct answer
old min height of 3 meters so you can see I am still none the wiser this is why i contacted JA have you tried the google website ? I would like to know the correct a
You will appreciate, I'm sure, that I will only advise on the basis of legislation, whether it be a Statute or a Statutory Instrument. I have access to a number of sources and the latest authority is the SI of 2002 to which I have referred you. I don't exclude Google, indeed it can very often be of assistance where other sources have failed me.In this case, Google also references that same SI and nothing later.
In these circumstances, as BT have given different information, I think that it would be reasonable to ask them whether such information is based on a particular piece of legislation and if so, which one. Alternatively, are these merely self imposed standards
Leaving our 'deal' to one side, I assume that it is important for you to know otherwise you would not have asked trhe question. Its significance from a legal point of view is:- "Tom drives his truck along a highway and the load catches on a BT cable, causing damage to the load and to the truck. I act for Tom. Do I bring his action based on their breach of Statutory Duty or (having regard to some peculiarity or other) do I base it on a simple duty of care 'having regard to......'
BT should be willing to tell you upon what basis their information is given.
I have given the basis for mine. Do they wish to correct me? I am, of course willing to be corrected, as you know.
No message came through with that last post (timed 9.00 PM)
The reason I would like to know and get facts right is the wire in dispute is my neighbours BT had to fit a new wire for him the wires are all fitted to the dormer bungalow window in the roof they told him they could' nt put the wire back
there because Health & Safety rules would' nt allow them to put it back there, so they
attached to his garage which is semi detached to my garage at rear of our bungalows my
property being 5ft 6in higher than his I could stand in my drive and touch the wire, I requested they move it further over they could' nt because they could 'nt get the new height of 3.7 meters off ground after a lot of complaining they have moved it further over
which makes it much lower than and unsightly after complaining they say it is legally placed when I reqested they move it over in the place they implyed it was 'nt and they
are not willing to discuss it with me or show me any legislation
No message received from you since my last message 20' th 2008
Please could you clarify where we stand on this issue
Dear XXXXX, I have just received your message, as I said in last email I am still none the wiser, this why I contacted JA B.T given me so many conflicting excuses they told me the old regulation height was 3meters and the new height is 3.7meters. I have sent sent two emails to Kim Cabot at JA with regards XXXXX XXXXX refund, but have not received a reply.
I do not mean to be rude in any way. but I have never mentioned agricultural land only private driveways etc. So what if we settle for a 50% refund and leave it at that
I've had no reply to my email I sent you on 27/11/08 with regards XXXXX XXXXX refund
DISCLAIMER: Answers from Experts on JustAnswer are not substitutes for the advice of an attorney. JustAnswer is a public forum and questions and responses are not private or confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. The Expert above is not your attorney, and the response above is not legal advice. You should not read this response to propose specific action or address specific circumstances, but only to give you a sense of general principles of law that might affect the situation you describe. Application of these general principles to particular circumstances must be done by a lawyer who has spoken with you in confidence, learned all relevant information, and explored various options. Before acting on these general principles, you should hire a lawyer licensed to practice law in the jurisdiction to which your question pertains.
The responses above are from individual Experts, not JustAnswer. The site and services are provided “as is”. To view the verified credential of an Expert, click on the “Verified” symbol in the Expert’s profile. This site is not for emergency questions which should be directed immediately by telephone or in-person to qualified professionals. Please carefully read the Terms of Service (last updated February 8, 2012).