In various reports, you may have read that Cellnex states that it is not the owner/lessor of the towers in the Netherlands.
Even during the first preliminary relief proceedings on 19 November 2024, the lawyer employed by On Tower Netherlands 3 B.V. reported that the wrong party had been summoned.
The judge fell for this hook, line and sinker, and the first preliminary relief proceedings were dismissed.
In hindsight, I can no longer say that this is incorrect. I should have appealed or something to that effect. I therefore hope that the judge will read this or that someone will bring it to his attention and think, ‘Yes, you have a point here!
Considering all the letters and documents we have received from Cellnex and all the publications on the internet, as well as the two explicit emails from Alticom to us as a customer, stating on 31 October 2018 that Alticom will SOON become Cellnex. (‘As of January 2019, we will have completely transitioned to the Cellnex name’).
A little later, on 11 April 2019
“Dear customer,
At the end of last year, we were proud to announce that Alticom would be getting a new name: Cellnex. We are now pleased to announce that the time has come! We are officially called Cellnex”.
Naturally, we therefore summoned Cellnex to court in 2024.
Because I am not allowed to publish everything and the solicitor, who was employed by Broadcast Partners at the time, attempted to ban me from these review sites during the first preliminary relief proceedings, I have to use links such as those below in some situations.
ALTICOM BECOMES CELLNEX
On 28 February 2024, the solicitor summoned me to remove the site (review site) Cellnex-Telecom.nl and the information posted on it. This was based on a whole host of legal terms. I immediately complied with Cellnex/Alticom and its employees (even before the actual summons), not because I was afraid, but purely because I did not want to immediately cast people in the workplace who did not deserve it in a bad light.
In hindsight, this is of course complete nonsense. After all, it only concerned the initials of the employees. There are now about 14 sites that carry the title Cellnex review site. The content on these sites is also filled in by several people. I would never be able to keep up with this on my own.
Anyway, back to the letter of summons. This post is about the fact that Cellnex claims it is not the owner/lessor of the tower(s).
“In 2014, you entered into the “agreement for the use of Alticom B.V.’s communication infrastructure” (hereinafter: Framework Agreement) and the Individual Lease Agreement falling under it with Alticom B.V., on the basis of which you may use the Cellnex tower in Lelystad until 1 March 2024. Alticom B.V. has been
taken over by Cellnex and also trades under the name Cellnex”.
Shoot me down. Here again, there is talk of Cellnex owning Alticom and therefore also owning the towers.
And the basis of ‘may use it until 1 March 2024’ is a blatant lie.
On or around 4 February 2024, I requested access to the Lelystad tower. This access was denied to me, and so I stood in front of a closed door twice, together with a technical employee of the police. Why? Because, according to the access department, access is not granted in the event of an active termination (notice). The police officer therefore travelled from Amsterdam to Lelystad twice for nothing.
Given that the first attempt at termination dates from November 2022, access has also been denied since November 2022, as I have experienced several times in 2023.
Of course, there are many other publications and reports that all substantiate that the correct party has indeed been summoned. An appeal or the revocation of summary proceedings could be an option. However, I am convinced that making the truth public (well substantiated) will yield a much better result. Better than summary proceedings that Cellnex (the lawyer employed by On Tower Netherlands 3 B.V.) has failed to achieve its goal of ‘the agreements’ by means of incorrect information provided by Cellnex/Alticom.
The relationship has already been disrupted to such an extent that I have to assume that, as far as I am concerned, repair is no longer an option. Unless Cellnex apologises so profusely for their behaviour that you can hardly do anything else.
At the bottom of this argument, you will see a screenshot of the site that the solicitor showed during the hearing in his counterclaim. Because this is very unclear, I will tell you what the most important text on this page is: ‘There is nothing here’. And that is not much, I can tell you.
If the lawyer still wants to give it a shot, he now has plenty of time to copy all the messages spread across many review sites.
Given that I have to give up my voluntary work in the interests of 12,500 Dutch radio amateurs because of this sickening action by Cellnex/Alticom, the many sites will soon be filled with dozens, perhaps hundreds, of messages.
In addition, I will ask the court in proceedings on the merits to award damages for the costs and the impact on my health.
Because health is more important than money, I am trying to suppress this as much as possible by writing everything off.
