Cancelled installation due to wayleave expiry - request for compensation

Hi SimonW_Windsor thanks for your post here in the Community although we're sorry to hear of the concerns you've raised here.

I would like to look into this for you, please expect a PM from me to arrive shortly and respond directly when you can!
Please note, I am off on annual leave from now until December 27th so thanks for your patience in the meantime.

Have a great Christmas and we'll get do our best to get this resolved for you.

Many thanks

This has a strong whiff of VM bungling and 'confusion' about it (both of which are very common in topics on here regarding VM installations). Soooo many things wrong with this description of VM failure it's hard to know where to begin.

First bit of 'confusion' is the idea of the wayleave expiring. The document which is most often cited on here is this one

https://store.virginmedia.com/content/dam/eSales/networkexpansion/Wayleave/access_agreement.pdf

which notes in point 10 that the agreement is in force as long as VM is a telecoms operator. So, do you know if this was the document in question? If so, I am not sure how it can expire as VM would require access to any cable on your shared drive into the future for maintenance etc.

Was it a neighbour who had to sign the wayleave? Do you know details of when the neighbour signed and does the neighbour have a copy of what was signed (which you can reference).

Something that could possibly expire is a council permit to carry out work in the street (if that featured in your installation at all). There are regular topics on here where VM applies for a permit (which does have a time-limit on it) and VM blunders about failing to do the work within the limit of the permit and so a delay is caused.

You should refer to the OFCOM minimum requirements for auto compensation

https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0026/216962/Industry-Code-of-Practice-for-Automatic-Compensation.pdf

and para 40d which is what VM will fall back on to avoid paying (namely while waiting for wayleave or for a council permit for street work)

Any reduction in compensation is only limited though to the time taken while waiting for wayleave to be signed or for the council permit to be provided (it does not remove altogether the need to pay compensation)

What we see regularly on here in forum topics is VM tries to blame the whole of a very long delay on a wait for wayleave or a council permit so VM will claim it owes no compensation. VM then offers to pay a much smaller 'goodwill' gesture payment (as has happened to you)

VM's other dodge to avoid paying is the concept of the 'provisional' installation date. This is something VM has invented itself to avoid, or reduce, pay-outs. The word 'provisional' does not appear in the OFCOM document.

Para 9 refers to the 'date initially confirmed in writing' to 'activate' services as the starting point for compensation.

The claim of a 'provisional' date has been tested at arbitration and feedback on here has been that the adjudicator rejected VM's 'provisional' invention and awarded compensation to the customer. In only one case I can recall, the adjudicator did make some reductions in the pay-out based on the fact that VM had made mention of the 'provisional' date at some point in comm's with the customer. Much will depend on what you were told along the way about the original installation date.

Also worth noting that VM does have the right to stop paying compensation and cancel the job if it cannot install. If VM is going to do that it has to issue you with a 'cease notice' for the compensation and continue paying you compensation for 30 days beyond the cease notice.

I can't recall a topic on here where VM has followed the correct procedure in giving the customer a formal 'cease notice'. Usually the customer only finds out by chance that VM has cancelled the job (as in your case).

Past topics on here describe how VM is hopelessly bad at following the auto comp rules correctly (either through mis-applying the rules or trying to invent their own rules). There is plenty of case history on here where customers have gone to arbitration and won full compensation (even when VM said none was due).

The devil is in the detail though in providing a clear timeline of events, with corresponding evidence, to allow the adjudicator to track the case and come to a conclusion on what is due to you in line with the auto comp rules. Feedback on here is that VM often produces little/no evidence or the evidence which VM presents is an incomprehensible mess or is just based on unsubstantiated claims. If you can do a better job with your evidence than VM, you are likely to be awarded something.

https://www.commsombudsman.org/our-process

Those who have used the arbitration process have generally reported back on here that the process was accessible, efficient, fair and easy to progress.

Your case sounds like the usual bungling and delay from VM and a very likely prospect of VM trying to blame the whole thing on a delayed wayleave so as to claim they owe you nothing.

I decided not to say in my first post (as I wanted to keep it short) that I contacted the Communications Ombudsman (Phone: 0330 440 1614). I’ve also asked Virgin Media for a full subject access request (ASR), or as Virgin Media call it a DSER, in preparation for my complaint to the Ombudsman. In addition, as a result of my call to the Ombudsman I have re-opened my complaints (as per references above) on the 19th Nov 2023. I now have 2 months to wait for Virgin Media to resolve it, or for Virgin Media to provide me with a deadlock letter, or a final position letter. During these two months of waiting (or resolution) I will need to contact Virgin Media a total of 8 times before I can refer my complaint to the Ombudsman.