ᐅ No Internet Access in the New Housing Development – DigiNetz Act?

OWLer schrieb:

The telecom company wanted to install fiber optic cables under the street, but roughly two years after the rest of the infrastructure was completed. As a result, the local utility was forced to step in at short notice.

That sounds very much like an urban legend to me.

OWLer schrieb:

If the developer responsible for your housing estate isn't completely incompetent, someone will ensure that an internet connection is installed in the street.

To my knowledge, the first provider to express interest has the right to carry out the installation—but they have one year to complete it. Traditionally, telecom companies tend to claim the area as exclusive operators “just in case” or to prevent competitors from entering the market, even if the area isn’t profitable; if the development isn’t worthwhile, implementation is simply delayed. Because of this, such reservations have an “expiration date” so competitors cannot be blocked indefinitely. Some smaller competitors, however, are more agile and quickly secure new housing developments. I have only seen municipal utilities take over in commercial areas. There, companies often receive a circular letter with the message: “Once 150 of you have signed up, we will start construction.” The timeline calculated in such cases typically predicts service availability in just over one year.

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

Just take a look at the law and present it to the developer.

DigiNetzG §77i

(7) In the context of construction work fully or partially funded by public money for the provision of transport services, where the initially planned duration exceeds eight weeks, it must be ensured that suitable passive network infrastructure, equipped with fiber optic cables, is installed as needed to enable the operation of a digital high-speed network by private operators of public telecommunications networks. In the development of new residential areas, it must always be ensured that suitable passive network infrastructure, equipped with fiber optic cables, is installed.

This is extremely important to me. I have previously selected rental properties based on broadband availability.
In times of home office, this could decide job opportunities in the future. We no longer allow anyone to work from home without proof of a minimum speed.

guckuck2 schrieb:

Just take a look at the law and present it directly to the developer.

DigiNetzG §77i

This is extremely important to me. I have already selected previous rental properties based on broadband internet availability.
In times of home office, this can decide future job options. We no longer allow anyone to work from home without proof of a minimum connection speed.

This paragraph really gives hope. I’ve also read that if the municipality does not enforce the law, nothing happens.
There appears to be no penalty for violations.
I will continue to follow up and report back.

launchme schrieb:

This paragraph really gives some hope. I also read that if the municipality does not implement the law, nothing will happen.

The law itself is somewhat nonsensical, since municipalities do develop building areas but rarely (meaning exceptions are hardly worth mentioning) operate communication networks. If a municipality were to register with the Federal Network Agency (BNetzA) as a potential fiber optic provider, it would be told that it is not an authorized network operator. So this is typical nonsense from politicians who don’t understand their own responsibilities.

In practice, it works like this: the municipality carries out a development plan procedure, the telecom provider learns about it as a third-party authority (TöB) and then decides whether the area is commercially interesting. This is where the market economy comes into play — the missing demand is the fault of the users themselves: the circle closes exactly where potential property buyers are waiting for high-speed internet — which only arrives when they actually place an order. If you and the neighbors in this development decide to wait, you can spend the time betting whether Godot or Saint Neverarrives will come first.

The municipality only has to ensure that fiber optics are taken into account — it does not have to find a network operator willing to lay the cables. Nor does it have to install fiber itself and later sell it to a network operator (which would be prevented by municipal business law). Once again, one hand doesn’t know what the other (doesn’t) do. All amateurs ;-(

---

https://www.instagram.com/11antgmxde/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/bauen-jetzt/

I believe the correct term for this law is the "Broadband Expansion Prevention Act."

The local authority told me that the procedure is as follows: All service providers are contacted. (In this case, the development area with about 75 building plots was too small for the main provider (praise be to the headquarters in Bonn).

Grants (of which there are supposedly plenty of well-funded pots) cannot be applied for by the municipality, because the average speed is simply too high!! (Unfortunately) ... (My fault: 500 Mbit/s with Vodafone + 250 Mbit/s over Telekom)

And, of course, the city/municipality etc. had (would have had) the option to lay expensive special conduit pipes as part of the site development. But this is mostly not done. It costs a hefty approximately 1€ per m² (1 dollar per 11 square feet) in additional development fees 😕

If it weren’t so sad, it would be funny. My first five books about stories with telecommunications providers are already full, but every day new stories are added.

11ant schrieb:

The law doesn’t make much sense because while municipalities do develop building areas, they usually (i.e., exceptions are rarely worth mentioning) don’t operate communication networks. If a municipality registered with the Federal Network Agency to become a fiber optic provider, they would be told they are not a licensed network operator. So it’s typical nonsense from politicians who don’t understand their own responsibilities.

Sorry, but that’s typical 11ant bar talk again, culminating in the supposed incompetence of unknown third parties.

The law refers to passive communication infrastructure. That means, at worst, the municipality only needs to install fiber optic cables, nothing more. This does not make them a network operator or provider by any means.

In practice, the municipality tenders the fiber optic supply just like sewage or road construction and usually has a framework contract for it.
If no one responds to the tender, they have to install the fiber themselves, as mentioned above.

launchme schrieb:

The paragraph really gives hope. I’ve also read that if the municipality does not implement the law: nothing happens.
A violation likely isn’t sanctioned.

At least the paragraph opens up the (promising) legal route.

Department heads and mayors generally don’t like it when it’s publicly shown how they violate federal laws.