Power Poles on Private Land: How to Claim Compensation Step by Step

Property owners burdened with utility infrastructure like high-voltage lines or power poles can demand financial compensation, provided they navigate complex legal hurdles and potential claims of adverse possession.

The Real Cost of Utility Infrastructure on Private Land

Power poles and high-voltage lines lead directly to a drop in property value. Property owners can, however, demand compensation for these installations. Most people live under the belief that nothing can be done about it after years pass, and utility companies eagerly use the threat of adverse possession. However, case law is shifting the balance of power. Check how to avoid being deprived of money and how much you can really recover.

The presence of transmission infrastructure on private property has for years been a source of serious legal and financial doubts for many landowners. High- and medium-voltage lines, power poles, pipelines, and other transmission devices not only limit the free disposal of a plot, but very often significantly lower its market value and hinder or completely prevent the realization of construction plans.

Many property owners wonder whether the transmission company has the right to use their private property without a formal agreement and what claims are available when a transmission easement has not been established on the land. Applicable civil law provisions give owners concrete tools to defend their rights and seek financial compensation, but this process requires knowledge of regulations and avoiding mistakes that can irrevocably deprive them of the right to money.

Legal Rights and the Transmission Easement

The primary legal instrument regulating the relationship between a property owner and a power company is the provisions of the Civil Code, with particular emphasis on Article 305¹. This provision clearly states that a property can be burdened in favor of an enterprise that plans to build transmission devices or is their current owner.

This burden takes the form of a transmission easement, which gives the company the right to use the property within a strictly defined scope, consistent with the purpose of the installed devices. What does this mean in practice? The transmission company gains the formal authority to maintain, service, and operate its poles or lines on someone else’s land. Meanwhile, the property owner acquires the option to obtain appropriate remuneration for this restriction.

In practice, transmission easement also applies to devices that were installed on the plot many years ago. It is worth knowing that infrastructure located on a given property for decades does not automatically deprive the landowner of the right to demand payment. As a rule, as long as the transmission company does not acquire the right to the land through the adverse possession of an easement, the owner is entitled to file a financial claim. As legal counsel Hanna Górska from the Law City foundation emphasizes, the remuneration paid for this title may take the form of a one-time cash payment or periodic cyclical payments, depending on the arrangements made between the parties.

How Court Appointed Experts Calculate Compensation

What amount can the owner demand from the power company? Regulations do not specify rates for erecting a specific type of pole, which is why professional valuation performed by a court expert is of key importance in disputed cases.

When determining the amount of due remuneration, the expert conducts a detailed analysis of a number of technical and economic factors. Among them, priority importance is given to specific criteria.

It is also worth paying attention to the situation in which the transmission easement expires. According to the regulations, upon the expiry of such a right, the company is unconditionally obliged to remove all devices from the area that hinder the owner from further using the property. In cases where the dismantling of the infrastructure turns out to be too costly or unfeasible for technical reasons, the landowner is entitled to an additional claim for damages for the damage suffered.

The Dangers of Unauthorized Removal

Property owners should not decide to independently remove infrastructure from their property. The law prohibits them from doing so. The dismantling or destruction of transmission devices is illegal, even when the investor never obtained official consent for their installation.

What penalties face a property owner for such an action? A person who decides to physically remove a pole or cut a line on their own exposes themselves to civil liability for the damage caused, and in selected cases also to criminal liability for property damage or creating danger.

The 30-Year Trap of Adverse Possession

A problem for plot owners may be the invocation by the power company of the defense of adverse possession of the transmission easement. Why? If adverse possession occurs, the property owner irretrievably loses the right to demand the removal of the infrastructure and—what may be incomprehensible to some—also loses the right to any remuneration for the use of their land.

According to the provisions of civil law, adverse possession of a transmission easement occurs after 30 years of uninterrupted possession, when the company acted in so-called bad faith. Bad faith is defined as a situation in which the entity using the land had knowledge or, while maintaining due diligence, should have known that it did not hold a legal title to the property.

This is confirmed by the position of the Supreme Court expressed in the judgment of December 17, 2008 (case file II CSK 346/08). The court then ruled that placing energy infrastructure on private land without obtaining the prior consent of the owner is tantamount to taking possession of the property in bad faith. Therefore, if a full 30 years have passed since the day the poles were erected, during which the transmission company continuously used the installations, the easement may have been acquired by adverse possession.

The legal effects of adverse possession are absolute for the owner’s assets. As follows from the Supreme Court judgment of June 15, 2016 (case file II CSK 639/15), after the occurrence of easement adverse possession, the property owner no longer has the right to either a claim for the removal of devices or a claim for payment of remuneration for the use of the land. This also applies to periods preceding the adverse possession itself.

Pre-1989 Rules and Unexpected Opportunities for Owners

Although the law favors power companies, in reality their situation is not always as advantageous as they try to present in procedural documents. Of key importance here is the analysis of the historical period before the systemic changes in Poland.

Until 1989, power plants in Poland did not constitute independent legal entities, but operated exclusively in the name and on behalf of the State Treasury as part of so-called uniform state ownership. This issue was the subject of a ruling by the Supreme Court, which in the judgment of June 5, 2009 (case file IV CSK 291/09) clearly noted that the period in which enterprises operated as state organizational units before 1989 is not subject to inclusion in the running of the adverse possession period for the benefit of current transmission enterprises.

What does this mean in practice? The running of the adverse possession period for private or transformed transmission companies in many cases could have begun only after the systemic transformation. As a result, the actual time needed to acquire the right by adverse possession is often significantly shorter than that declared by power plants in their letters, which opens up a real chance for many owners to win the dispute and obtain high compensation.

Action Plan: Recovering Money Step by Step

People who want to regulate the legal situation of their own plot and obtain the due funds should act according to a strictly defined plan. Chaotic letters or a lack of consistency can make it easier for the company to claim adverse possession.

In a lawsuit, the property owner can submit specific demands regarding the legal settlement of the infrastructure.

Litigation Strategy and Legal Support

Lawsuits aimed at regulating the rights to transmission devices and obtaining compensation for power poles on a plot belong to cases with a high degree of complexity. However, one should not succumb to pressure from energy concerns. Every case should be consulted with a real estate law specialist, and then calmly and consistently pursued to recover the money owed.

Does a power pole or line on a private plot give the right to remuneration? The transmission easement gives the company the right to use the property within a strictly defined scope. The property owner acquires the option to obtain appropriate remuneration for this restriction.

What does the remuneration for a power pole on a plot depend on according to the court expert’s valuation? Regulations do not specify rates for erecting a specific type of pole. The court expert analyzes, among others, the current market value of the property, the area of the transmission strip, the degree of interference, and inconveniences and obstacles.

When does adverse possession of a transmission easement strip away the right to land remuneration? Adverse possession of a transmission easement occurs after 30 years of uninterrupted possession when the company acted in bad faith. After adverse possession, the property owner is not entitled to a claim for the removal of devices or payment of remuneration.

Does the period before 1989 count toward the adverse possession of a transmission easement? The Supreme Court in the judgment of June 5, 2009 (IV CSK 291/09) noted that the period of operation of enterprises as state organizational units before 1989 is not included in the running of the adverse possession period for the benefit of current transmission enterprises.

How can a plot owner start recovering money from a transmission company? The plan includes a written summons to the transmission company to prove the legal basis, a proposal for an out-of-court agreement on establishing a transmission easement for financial equivalent, and in the event of refusal or lack of documents, referral of the case to court.