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

There has never been and is no talk of an unrestricted obligation to tolerate. The obligation to tolerate applies to facilities for public local supply that do not unreasonably restrict the property owner.

Correct is: the obligation to tolerate according to §12 applies to new lines, whose installation/attachment is announced with sufficient notice and technically indispensable.

Does not fully apply to the description of the OP.

As long as the thread starter withholds the important facts, it is very tedious to discuss whether the position of the line is now secured via NAV or should have been secured by means of an easement. Both variants have been explained here in detail. Especially since TEN is known to me as a very conscientious network operator who is quite aware of the importance of a secured line position.

Assuming that the OP is telling the truth to some extent, TEN (see above) has a problem – I stand by that.

What I have experienced – professionally and privately – from "conscientious network operators" in terms of output defies description anyway. The worst thing, however, is not that something occasionally goes wrong during countless cable installations or similar, but the systematic attempt to shift such damages onto uninformed private property owners.

In this respect, you are only right if the OP lied regarding the freedom from encumbrance of his property. However, if that is true and no building encumbrance and/or easement is registered, then there was a legally binding inquiry and then it is completely irrelevant that the cable is actually there – then it is TEN’s problem.

Best regards
Dirk Grafe

Correct is: the obligation to tolerate according to §12 applies to new lines

Where did you get this nonsense from? In the scope of application of NAV §1, it says quite clearly:

The regulation applies to all network connection agreements concluded after July 12, 2005, and is also applicable to all connection usage agreements that arose before its entry into force.

I have said all there is from my side. The original poster has left and you are sticking to your opinion. So that's it from me.

So, something from me again. It has been very stressful here with us. Unfortunately, everyone says something different, TEN still insists that the cable was laid in the GDR and that they are therefore out of the game; unfortunately, they also refuse to negotiate. We have now agreed to the rerouting at our expense, since we want to continue; the house MUST be finished by the end of the year and unfortunately we don't have time to keep running to the lawyer, and everyone knows how long such a process can drag on. The annoying thing is that it has been above freezing for almost a week and the company from TEN is not starting, the manager is on vacation and the rest have no clue. -.- I was already about to write everything down and share it on social networks as well as the press but I don't think TEN cares, since they now have something like a monopoly here.

Unfortunately, everyone says something different, TEN still insists that the line was installed in the GDR and that they are therefore off the hook,

You can read here and also easily google that this is _not_ necessarily/unquestionably the case. However, a map/line plans/cadastral excerpts, if possible also from GDR times (explicitly no own drawings), would definitely help here.

The core question remains whether there is any legal protection of the line, such as an easement/servitude, a building encumbrance/public registration, or any other proof that is legally equivalent.

To check this, you can obtain information from the building encumbrance register by phone, usually free of charge, which is maintained by the municipality/district. If no encumbrance is registered, you would find that out after 5 minutes.

The same applies to the servitude: was there really a land register inquiry regarding this at your purchase? Is the absence of burdens secured in the purchase contract or has this risk been excluded by the seller/notary and transferred to you? Check the purchase contract for this, if necessary obtain a current land register excerpt or check the excerpt from the purchase contract if it was obtained at the time. After purchase, you should also have received a current land register excerpt; do you have it? What does section II say?

unfortunately, they also refuse to negotiate, we have now agreed to the relocation at our own expense,

Unbelievable.

The only annoying thing is that it has been above freezing for almost a week now and the company from TEN hasn’t started, the supervisor is on vacation and the rest have no clue. -.-

My tip: this will take time if you don’t follow up specifically. This is small stuff and no one cares.

I was also already about to write everything down and share it on social networks as well as the press but I don’t believe TEN cares, since they pretty much have a monopoly here.

Exactly. That’s why you have to tackle them differently. The way you approach it is pure luck.

Best regards
Dirk Grafe

So, I haven't read through the entire purchase contract, but we have a complete excerpt from the land register and there is nothing mentioned there. I also once called the cadastral office and they didn't know of any lines either. I will also call the register of building encumbrances. The only strange thing is, when I had the shaft plans sent to me, all the cables were drawn in, including the power cable that runs through our property. We were also told that such an old cable does not have to be registered in the land register. -.-

So I haven’t read the entire purchase contract, but we have a complete excerpt from the land register and there’s nothing in it. I also called the cadastral office once and they didn’t know of any cables. I will also call the register of building encumbrances.

Do that, then we’ll be informed, but I don’t believe there is an entry for the cable.

The strange thing is, when I had the shaft plans sent to me, all cables were drawn in there, including the power cable running through our property.

Those are two completely different things. The utility companies naturally have plans of their cables and you can request those at any time, but those are their own private plans – that only proves that a cable is located somewhere, it says nothing about how it is legally secured.

We were also told that such an old cable doesn’t have to be registered in the land register. -.-

That is the crucial question. Was this only told to you over the phone or do you have it in writing? The mere assertion that the cable does not have to be secured in the land register implies that they have no proof of this. If the statement exists in writing, the letter must make the legal source clear to you as a layperson on which the TEN bases this. The letter must clearly show how the TEN denies responsibility or how, from TEN’s point of view, the existing legal security is justified, even if no land register or public law security exists.

Only when all of this including all other plans etc. is available can one even begin to check whether the TEN is right or not.

Best regards Dirk Grafe