As in Telecoms Code - LTA 1954, it is vital to ensure that any lease with a telecoms operator is contracted out of LTA 1954. Common terms include:

if the lease is sufficiently long, there should be a provision for rent reviews. A market for comparables has now developed, so an ‘open market rent’ may be appropriate. Alternatively, one could have a stepped rent, or an increase based on RPI;

operators should be liable for rates and all other outgoings resulting from the installation of their equipment;

a landowner should try to ensure that use of the site is restricted to the initial apparatus and equipment specified. This will allow negotiations for an additional sum if the equipment is upgraded at a later date;

consider making the user personal (ie restricted) to that particular operator. If the operator subsequently wants to share the site (as is becoming increasingly common) then it will be possible to negotiate for a higher rent;

the operator should be fully responsible for maintaining the equipment and for complying with all statutory requirements. The operator should also be obliged to comply with guidelines issued by the International Commission on non-ionising radiation protection (ie dangers of electro-magnetic radiation), with there being a full indemnity from the operator against all claims arising from the equipment being on the property, whether that be health issues, damage caused by falling or dangerous equipment, or electrical interference.

There are hardly any reported cases on the operations of the Telecoms Code (now properly referred to as the Electronic Communications Code) because operators prefer to negotiate rather than litigate – a weakness that landowners should always bear in mind. See [2009] SJ 29 September 11.