# Just talked to apt. complex, said no private sat dishes allowed at all?



## jaschier (Mar 28, 2005)

They said they have their own satellite dishes and only provide that service, only 52 channels, the local cable companies will not wire the complex. Can they do that? (not allow private satellite dishes? I thought federal law prevented them from doing that. Could it possibly be a provision of the company that provides them the complex-wide sat service? (they have several 5 foot dishes with no markings/labelings).


----------



## n8dagr8 (Aug 14, 2004)

Tough one because they provide you with service. 

Search the threads about have an antenna on your own property - i think it was in someones signature, too. There is legislation that allows you to do what it takes to get television service and I'm pretty sure if it is not affixed to anything or on the roof (needs to be in "private" space) they can't stop you. I have mine sitting on my porch because they didn't want it attached and I didn't mind obliging (sp?).


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

Yup, the experts on this thing should weigh in soon, but the complex cannot legally block you from erecting a dish in an exclusive-use area (such as a balcony), except for very unusual circumstances (historic district, etc.).

As long as there is some channel that you want that you can get with your dish but can't get any other way, you should be good. You might need a tripod or pole-in-a-bucket-of-cement, but if you can see the satellite from your balcony, it should work.


----------



## jdspencer (Nov 8, 2003)

Here's the FCC info on this. http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html


----------



## TNGTony (Mar 23, 2002)

For those that have an aversion to clicking on a link, here is the meat of the FCC rules.



> The rule (47 C.F.R. Section 1.4000) has been in effect since October 1996, and it *prohibits restrictions that impair the installation, maintenance or use ofantennas used to receive video programming. The rule applies to video antennas including direct-to-home satellite dishes that are less than one meter(39.37") in diameter (or of any size in Alaska), TV antennas, and wireless cableantennas.* The rule prohibits most restrictions that: (1) unreasonably delay orprevent installation, maintenance or use; (2) unreasonably increase the cost ofinstallation, maintenance or use; or (3) preclude reception of an acceptablequality signal.
> 
> *Effective January 22, 1999, the Commission amended the rule so that it also applies to rental property where the renter has an exclusive use area, such as a balconyor patio.*
> 
> ...


See ya
Tony


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

The fact that your apt complex has its own MDU satellite system does not affect or diminish your rights under FCC regs to mount your own dish within your "exclusive-use" balcony or patio area. Since your apt management is adverse to the use of private dishes, be sure to stay within the guidelines of the FCC rules.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I know there are provisions (as others have mentioned above) about exclusive use areas, as long as you don't make any holes or "damage" to the property you are renting.

That said... I think a lot of people have trouble grasping the difference between owing their own home and renting an apartment. Think of it this way... if you were renting a room in your house (or the whole house)... would you permit the tenant to make holes when and where he wanted?

There are less freedoms when you rent than when you own, for the simple reason that you are not the owner of the property you are thinking about defacing.

Now, while I don't get the people who are "offended" by seeing satellite dishes and antennas... I do understand the ones who don't want a bunch of holes poked in their structures.


----------



## SimpleSimon (Jan 15, 2004)

No argument - but I just came back from adding a receiver in a motel complex that caters to more permanent residents. One family has just gone from two to three "rooms" in the complex, so they needed a third box.

Owner's only concern was to not to go tromping on the shake roof over the walkway. No problem!  I just threw the cable over that part, and didn't screw it down for that short distance - just like the other feeds.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Now that's something I hadn't heard of... a Hotel/Motel going the extra mile to cater to a regular customer. That's cool.

If I were a landlord, I wouldn't mind tenants installing dishes as long as a quality installer came out to do the job (or I did it myself since it was my property). So I wouldn't be one of the blockers... but I can sometimes see the other side of it too and I know a lot of people who own their homes and don't want to drill holes in it.

I worked many years ago installing two-way radios in cars/trucks... and every once in a while someone came in with a brand new car... and it always felt funny drilling a hole in the roof (or the side, depending) for an antenna mount. Once you drill that hole, there was no real good way to patch it later... so I felt much more comfortable on work vehicles and old cars than the brand new ones!


----------



## SimpleSimon (Jan 15, 2004)

HDMe said:


> I know a lot of people who own their homes and don't want to drill holes in it.


What ticks me off is the @$$#0!e owners of custom homes that wouldn't spend the extra 42 cents to prewire, and then b* and moan about running cables outside. I slap them down on the spot.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

Many apartment properties have "sweetheart" deals with local cablecos and other MDU providers where they get kickbacks from the provider based on rates their tenants pay. Other properties run their own little programming package deals from satellite-based providers. Renters are often coerced into accepting the programming. 

This is the equivalent of an apartment operator telling tenants what local convenience store to patronize.

The crazy thing is, so many clueless people just shrug and go along with the deal, failing to consider, much less pursue, better options. :shrug:


----------



## cdru (Dec 4, 2003)

Nick said:


> The fact that your apt complex has its own MDU satellite system does not affect or diminish your rights under FCC regs to mount your own dish within your "exclusive-use" balcony or patio area. Since your apt management is adverse to the use of private dishes, be sure to stay within the guidelines of the FCC rules.


There is one case though that the MDU can affect your right to mount your own dish within exclusive use areas. If the MDU provides a community antenna for your use that has the same programming, quality of signal, doesn't cost extra, and doesn't take long to get hooked up, then you can't install a dish for that provider. This was probably most applicable for OTA "locals" but also applies to DBS providers. The first and second conditions though are usually the ones that would allow a renter to put their own dish up. Often DirecTV is available and Dish is wanted, or vice versa. And often an additional fee or rental of equipment could/would be construded as costing extra over the cost of just installing one yourself. The availablity or lack of ability of a particular type of receiver (DVR, HD, etc) may or may not come into play. It's not explicity spelled out.

But from the OTARD fact sheet:


> Q: If my association, building management, landlord, or property owner provides a central antenna, may I install an individual antenna?
> 
> A: Generally, the availability of a central antenna may allow the association, landlord, property owner, or other management entity to restrict the installation by individuals of antennas otherwise protected by the rule. Restrictions based on the availability of a central antenna will generally be permissible provided that: (1) the person receives the particular video programming or fixed wireless service that the person desires and could receive with an individual antenna covered under the rule (e.g., the personwould be entitled to receive service from a specific provider, not simply aprovider selected by the association); (2) the signal quality of transmission to and from the person's home using the central antenna is as good as, or better than, the quality the person could receive or transmit with an individual antenna covered by the rule; (3) the costs associated with the use of the central antenna are not greater than the costs of installation, maintenance and use of an individual antenna covered under the rule; and (4) the requirement to use the central antenna instead of an individual antenna does not unreasonably delay the viewer's ability to receive video programming or fixed wireless services.


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

So maybe I got this part right?


carload said:


> *As long as there is some channel that you want that you can get with your dish but can't get any other way*, you should be good.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

Nick said:


> Many apartment properties have "sweetheart" deals with local cablecos and other MDU providers where they get kickbacks from the provider based on rates their tenants pay. Other properties run their own little programming package deals from satellite-based providers. Renters are often coerced into accepting the programming.
> 
> This is the equivalent of an apartment operator telling tenants what local convenience store to patronize.


I wouldn't completely agree with that statement... In such a case, the owner of the apartment complex is making decisions about his property, and then allowing the renter/leaser to live there... still being the owner's property.

I know a lot of people who rent rooms in their house, for instance, and while the tenant gets certain privelages by law as a renter... he can't just make modifications on a whim without approval of the homeowner.

Imagine if landlords weren't permitted to restrict tenants... then apartments would be modified in ways that other future tenants wouldn't like... and the apartment wouldn't be rentable again without expense by the owner.

While I wouldn't have a problem with satellite dishes... I can understand that some people do... and we are supposedly in a free country, so it seems like the owner of the property should be free to discourage satellites... just as the renter is free to seek another place to live.



Nick said:


> The crazy thing is, so many clueless people just shrug and go along with the deal, failing to consider, much less pursue, better options. :shrug:


That part I agree with. So many people sign agreements, leases, etc. without reading the terms... then are "surprised" later. If you don't take the time to read what you sign, then it's hard to blame anyone but yourself.


----------



## FTA Michael (Jul 21, 2002)

HDMe, as far as I can tell, you're the only one talking about making modifications to an apartment. You don't need to drill holes for a balcony-based dish -- just a tripod and a piece of flat cable.


----------



## kenglish (Oct 2, 2004)

OK, so it's like the apartment owner saying that only FedEX can deliver onto their property, not the Post Office, Airborne, or UPS.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

carload said:


> HDMe, as far as I can tell, you're the only one talking about making modifications to an apartment. You don't need to drill holes for a balcony-based dish -- just a tripod and a piece of flat cable.


I'm talking about several situations actually... IF I owned the apartment, I wouldn't mind drilling holes even as long as it was done by a qualified person who took care in the work.

I know some landlords try and forbid it even in the scenario you suggest where no harm is done to the property... and I don't understand those landlords in that case.

But there is a big difference between what I would do, and what I think it is ok to force others to do... We supposedly live in a place where what we own is ours and we can control it, at least somewhat... so I'm hesitant to say everyone should say and do as I say and do.


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

HD, we're talking about a legal, non-attached, non-permanent install, not someone like Michael Keaton in _Pacific Heights_.


----------



## kenglish (Oct 2, 2004)

Maybe the landlord would be OK with you slipping their maintenance guy a few bucks to help you do it "right".


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

kenglish said:


> Maybe the landlord would be OK with you slipping their maintenance guy a few bucks to help you do it "right".


I've always done or directed my own installs. I would hope that every one here who has visited for any length of time here is more qualified to install a dish than the average maintenance man, of whom I've had many, and am somewhat qualified to judge.

As a rule, apt maintenance guys tend to be jacks of all trades and masters of only one, or maybe none. Ask me about the three maintenance guys, three months and ten new panes it took to replace four clouded window panes. Talk about your classic _Three Stooges_ fire drill. It would have been very entertaining if I hadn't been the hapless tenant who only wanted to be able to see out his windows. :shrug:


----------



## kenglish (Oct 2, 2004)

I'm talking about YOU do the work, and let the maintenance guy watch and take the responsibility .


----------



## Nick (Apr 23, 2002)

...or the blame.


----------



## kenglish (Oct 2, 2004)

..........Exactly  !


----------

