Power cable of TEN (Thuringian Energy Networks) on construction site

No, it is not my own supply line.

I am upset about a cable that is on my property, which does not belong there and is not registered in any book or office, so to me it does not belong there. I bought the property without any encumbrances.

Now I am supposed to pay for the fact that the supplier simply laid the cable "as they pleased" back then.

Apparently no one cared to find out whether there is anything in the ground.

But no one either registered or compensated for the right to lay anything there.

We had that at work. The property was acquired. Despite the registration of the transfer notice, a company suddenly started digging there and began laying some cables and installing a distribution box.
After some discussion with the parties involved, it turned out that the company assumed (based on outdated land register extracts) that the property still belonged to the city. They then had to dismantle everything properly.

But no one has registered/compensated the right to lay something there.

One thing has nothing to do with the other. Otherwise, there would probably have to be at least 4, rather 5 encumbrances recorded in section II of the land register for EVERY property. Just for the own supply lines to the house.

Since when has the pipeline been located there?

Since when have you been the owner of the property?

Has the seller guaranteed freedom from encumbrances in the purchase contract?

Who is the seller (private individual)?

Since when has the cable been roughly there? - Allegedly already before the reunification. Since when have you been the owner of the property? - About 2 years Has the seller guaranteed the freedom from encumbrances in the purchase contract? - It went through a notary and I honestly just relied on the land register extract. Who is the seller (private individual)? - Private individual

Without a lease agreement, easement, or permission, as the property owner you generally have a removal claim against the TEN. However, the network operator can initiate an expropriation procedure when asserting the removal claim, so the situation can also backfire.

- The TEN (or their predecessors) apparently failed to secure the line during the reunification (this was not necessary in the GDR)
- Your municipality/city or the TEN or their predecessors have apparently failed to register the respective easements during the land register adjustment procedure.
- The previous owner(s) neglected to demand/register the respective easements when selling the property
- At the moment, as the property owner, you are the one holding the black mark. The fact that you had digging done without a line inquiry does not make things easier; however, you can hold your contractor responsible here, since they also have a duty to investigate and may not rely solely on your oral statements.

Get back in touch with the TEN. Refer to the missing securing of the line (and not necessarily to your removal claim). Maybe you can agree on a cost sharing; you already have a contractor on site. But in principle, relocation costs are to be borne by the party causing them (you). However, you might have a claim against the previous owner, which would probably be difficult to enforce.

What does the purchase contract look like? Are lines mentioned on the property here?