This is seriously becoming annoying now.....

Until you get your order amended ( which you can do at any point ) you will have to notify them of all devices. I would include the router just to keep you safe so they dont make things harder for you.
I am no legal professional but from my research I do not believe your SHPO is smith compliant and your solicitor should have amended it.

Did they attempt to do so or were you simply given the SHPO right after court?

I spoke to my officer he told me to report it when I receive it.

I was concerned that he might say something about my first officer not wanting the details of the router I had when I was convicted.

Can you explain what’s wrong with my order?

If I recall correctly you mentioned your offence related to images? (apologies if that is incorrect)
If so then based on the information I have found both from the forum and other sources, SHPO's have to be what is considered "smith compliant"
What that basically means is SHPO's must be proportionate to an individuals offence, one example being: Those with image related offences (non contact) should not be given restrictions on contact if there is no evidence, especially when an individual has children of their own and could be considered an infringement of their child's rights to family life. https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff7a360d03e7f57eb094c paragraphs 21, 22, 23

Ah sorry no, mine was not an image based offence.

I decided the best thing to do was to get in touch with my allocated officer and he said he would want me to go in and register the new router so I said I would do this once it arrived.

My concern was because I was probably naive at the beginning of all this was, once convicted I went and did my notification and then once sentenced and given the SHPO I had an initial meeting with the allocated officer at the time which was different to who I have now and he didn’t record the details of my router just my phone and laptop. So was thinking will this cause issues? Will they think I had failed to register the first router? Because it was a face to face meeting there is no record to back up the convo from three years ago.

I also believe the order to notify police of devices is also being miss-used as it is not the purpose of the SHPO to force an individual to provide information as that is the purpose of the notification requirements. I will link the relevant source when I come across it again. But to put it simply. The SHPO are the donts where as the notification requirements are the do's.

If you were not given time to read and understand the contents of your order at least 2 days before sentencing and if no amendments were made by your solicitor, then I believe that also makes your SHPO not smith compliant if the order was given to you the same day as sentencing.

Basically what happened was, the CPS were trying to prosecute me for something I believed I had not done and therefore pleaded not guilty throughout.

My solicitor was trying to get the charge changed to a lesser charge and in the end that’s what happened, the CPS accepted this as I was prepared to please guilty as that’s what I was guilty of.

I had the hearing, pleaded guilty and had a same day appointment to get the PSR complete, my barrister told me that they were not making an application for a SHPO.

Four weeks later I attended sentencing and that’s when I found out an application had been made and granted. I was handed it at the end.

If that is the case then I would seek some legal advice in all honesty.

Take a look at paragraph 26 in the link I provided above.

Yes, I’ll have a look.

Will I be able to approach any solicitor for advice?

My solicitor does not work for the same firm anymore because it doesn’t exist no more.

On my other point, will it cause trouble that my first allocated officer didn’t record the router I had in my house when I was convicted and insisted he didn’t need it?

It never hurts to call up some local firms and ask questions which focus on criminal case types, I have done the same and honestly most I have spoken too simply know nothing about the smith court of appeal or any knowledge of the link I provided. How the PPU do their job really isn't your responsibility. if you offered the router and other devices for them to inspect and they decide not to is no fault of your own.