# 2 Buildings + 2 Dishes + Same Address = 1 Account ... Possible?



## Bluelude1 (Dec 5, 2009)

I have kind of an odd dilemma I am trying to resolve. Any help would be much appreciated.

Currently my house has a Dish Network HD Account with a VIP722 & VIP222 and now I am trying to get HD programming in my barn. The problem is the wire run from the house dish to the barn is 400+ft, across the entire length of house, and has to go under the 20' wide concrete driveway. So connecting my current dish to my barn isn't feasible. What I was wondering was if there would be any issue in getting another 722 from dish (under my house's account) and connecting it to an existing HD dish my tenant has installed on the barn?

I don't want to run the receiver under their account (i just want to use the same dish), but at the same token I don't really want to have 2 separate HD dishes installed on the same building or 2 separate accounts under my name all at a single address.

Is what I am trying to do possible? 


Thanks again for any help


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

The 722 is networkable, right? Have you looked into a wireless network connection/bridge? You may need directional antennas and there may be a bandwidth issue.


----------



## Bluelude1 (Dec 5, 2009)

SayWhat? said:


> The 722 is networkable, right? Have you looked into a wireless network connection/bridge? You may need directional antennas and there may be a bandwidth issue.


 Yes I have, wireless looks to have an issue from what I have read with lack of bandwidth for HD. But i very well might be missing something.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

The receivers won't know that they are not connected to the same dish ... they just need to be connected to the same phone line or internet connection to prove that the new receiver ... albeit 400ft away ... is in the same household as the rest of the account. It doesn't have to be heavy duty bandwidth for that data connection.

This is assuming that wherever your new 722 is going is part of your household and not for a second tenant/apartment/etc. DISH does not allow separate households to share accounts.


----------



## SayWhat? (Jun 7, 2009)

So, you're saying that the second 722 will need a second dish to actually receive the video, but can be connected to the main house system via wireless internet for the activation and account verification?


----------



## CABill (Mar 20, 2005)

Bluelude1 said:


> What I was wondering was if there would be any issue in getting another 722 from dish (under my house's account) and connecting it to an existing HD dish my tenant has installed on the barn?


It does sound odd to me to have a tennant that has put their dish on your barn or to even have HD in a barn. But I did want to mention that you already have two dual output receivers and if they are leased, you won't be able to add a leased receiver to your account - you'd have to purchase the receiver. If you purchased the existing 722 or 222, you would be able to get another 722 via the DISH'n It Up existing customer upgrade, and that would include installation in a "normal" setup. I don't know that your setup would fall into the "normal" category.

Borrowing the tennant's dish on your barn might be adequate for your HD needs with a phone line / wireless as suggested, but it isn't clear that it is also setup for 3 satellites (HD). Might be fine, might be an issue. Since you called it an HD dish, it probably isn't an issue and you could use it as long as there was a connection still unused on it.

Sharing a dish on two accounts is allowed. Sharing an account for multiple households isn't allowed.


----------



## boba (May 23, 2003)

Account stacking is what you are describing. Go ahead and do it but if the audit department checks your account you will lose any investment in equipment and reception capabilities.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

boba said:


> Account stacking is what you are describing. Go ahead and do it but if the audit department checks your account you will lose any investment in equipment and reception capabilities.


He is NOT account stacking.

You can use the existing dish at the barn IF your receiver in the barn is hooked up to the same phone number as your receivers in the house. If you don't have the SAME phone number in the barn you might have a problem with the audit team. If you needed to, running a phone line and getting it to work over the 400' would probably be easier than getting the satellite line to work over that distance.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

SayWhat? said:


> So, you're saying that the second 722 will need a second dish to actually receive the video, but can be connected to the main house system via wireless internet for the activation and account verification?


It should be able to ... extending the IP network a few hundred feet isn't impossible. At worst it would be expensive but not any more than 400ft of quality coax.



boba said:


> Account stacking is what you are describing. Go ahead and do it but if the audit department checks your account you will lose any investment in equipment and reception capabilities.


It doesn't sound like stacking to me ... the equipment is going to be used by the same household at the same address. The tenant has their own account. As long as this receiver isn't for another tenant or some other use that requires a separate account he should be OK.

If he was saying that he wanted to add a receiver on his account for his tenant, for a new tenant or for a business he was opening in the barn I'd agree that stacking was involved. So far, we have not received enough information to call it stacking.


----------



## 4HiMarks (Jan 21, 2004)

James Long said:


> It should be able to ... extending the IP network a few hundred feet isn't impossible. At worst it would be expensive but not any more than 400ft of quality coax.


I believe ethernet is limited to about 100 meters, so 400 ft of cat 5 or 6 probably isn't going to cut it without a repeater or some other type of signal booster. WiFi could possibly work with directional antennas. A phone line would probably be the best bet.


----------



## Michael P (Oct 27, 2004)

I just observed a D* set-up yesterday at a driving range that also has a sports bar an ice cream stand on the same property (all under the same business name). I saw a D* dish on the ice cream stand. I bet it's part of the same account they have in the sports bar.

So yes, you can use separate dishes on the same account at the same address.

Years ago I saw twin D* dishes on a house chimney. This was when 101 was the only D* orbital location (and years before multiswitches). I bet this house had 4 receivers back when a 2 output LNB was all that was available.


----------



## Bluelude1 (Dec 5, 2009)

I regards to some of the questions since I last posted.

#1 - am not adding an additional tenant (I don't particularly care for the one that is there already:nono2

#2 - I have an hardwired Ethernet connection that already connects the house an the barn so internet shouldn't be a problem (has been daisy chained to achieve the distance)

Both locations at the same address would be for my own personal use and would be able to share the same phone, internet & etc. so I assume that wouldn't count as stacking.

Thanks for all of the replys btw


----------



## coldsteel (Mar 29, 2007)

Yiour best bet is to check the dish the tenant has, then buy a receiver and dish (if needed).


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

4HiMarks said:


> I believe ethernet is limited to about 100 meters, so 400 ft of cat 5 or 6 probably isn't going to cut it without a repeater or some other type of signal booster. WiFi could possibly work with directional antennas. A phone line would probably be the best bet.


I would recommend fiber for such a run. The cost isn't negligible, but the performance benefit is substantial. I have installed two runs of 280' and 850' and they are just as good as any other segment of my network.

Note that I offer this in response to 4HiMarks' question.

For Bluedude1, what you are trying to do is specifically prohibited by the Residential Customer Agreement and probably also runs afoul of your ISP's terms as well.


----------



## stevecon (Sep 6, 2006)

Just a few notes about supplying 2 (or more) buildings from a single dish, network type (cat5/6) cables, and other electrical conductors:

It is very important to ensure that the buildings are supplied through a common electrical main or service disconnect switch. If it is not, equipment failures will abound - and that is the least of your worries. Shocks, burns and even death can result if conditions are right. If there are two separate electrical services, there will be a difference of "ground potential" and the conductor used for ground in the cable between buildings will become the path to equalize the voltages. This conductor is not sized to handle fault currents. While usually not a problem for equipment (due to the relative minor difference in voltages between the two electrical services); when lightning storms are present, there can be significant differences of voltages between the building electrical ground conductors. Burying cable underground (directly or in pipe - it doesn't matter) won't help, either. Lightning discharges into the ground effectively creates voltage by means of induction (like a transformer does) and results in damage to equipment and even injury to people and pets if they are in contact with the equipment when the condition exists. 

If unable to provide a source for the desired signals in each building's electrical service, the best way to handle the problem is to employ wireless routers with highly directional type antennas or the much more expensive fiber optic cable.

Note that this problem is noticed much more often when equipment is connected to each building's electrical service. A phone line run to another building to connect a standard telephone wouldn't be noticed - but that same line; when connected to a modem (internal or external - again, it doesn't matter) or a telephone that requires a connection to an outlet will likely soon fail. This is because the standard telephone doesn't come into contact with the other building's electrical service. 

Conductors run between buildings and panels always include a suitably sized ground conductor to alleviate these problems so that all buildings are at the same ground potential.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

harsh said:


> For Bluedude1, what you are trying to do is specifically prohibited by the Residential Customer Agreement and probably also runs afoul of your ISP's terms as well.


I doubt that very much. If this is so, please quote the portion of the RCA that applies.


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

Richard King said:


> He is NOT account stacking.


If you're serving two households with a single account, you're most certainly account stacking. It doesn't matter if you've figured out a way to fake it.


RCA said:


> H. Private Home Viewing Only. DISH Network provides Services to you solely for viewing, use and enjoyment in your private home. You agree that no Services provided to you will be viewed in areas open to the public, commercial establishments or other residential locations. Services may not be rebroadcast or performed, and admission may not be charged for listening to or viewing any Services.


The moment you rent or lease an area or an outbuilding of your house, that's not your private home anymore.


----------



## coldsteel (Mar 29, 2007)

harsh said:


> If you're serving two households with a single account, you're most certainly account stacking. It doesn't matter if you've figured out a way to fake it.


How is it 2 households? He's supplying his house and his barn, not his house and his tenant's house. So what if his portion of the barn and the tenant's portion are on the same foundation?


----------



## harsh (Jun 15, 2003)

coldsteel said:


> How is it 2 households? He's supplying his house and his barn, not his house and his tenant's house. So what if his portion of the barn and the tenant's portion are on the same foundation?


The question is one of having service in two structures, one of which hasn't been clearly defined as exclusive use.


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

harsh said:


> If you're serving two households with a single account, you're most certainly account stacking.


He's not serving two households with a single account. Each household has it's own account. What we are discussing is two buildings on the same property within the same household.

Here's a couple of theoreticals for you:
A single home has two levels. All the upstairs rooms have been converted into a separate two bedroom apartment. The downstairs rooms are configured as a separate two bedroom apartment. This is two households.

Take the same home and divide it differently ... instead of converting the entire upstairs to an apartment the back portion of the upstairs of the house has been converted and is now it's own household. The front portion upstairs and the downstairs remain one household. A receiver can be placed in the front upstairs bedroom on the downstairs account since it is the same household. Only the back portion upstairs has been severed.

Now get closer to what we have here ...
A home with a detached garage with a shop downstairs and a loft. The loft has been converted to an apartment and is it's own household. The shop area remains part of the home's household. Only the loft has been severed from the main household ... the customer could put a receiver in the shop as part of their household's account. Just like anyone with a detached garage and no apartment can put a receiver in the garage.

If you can find any language that prevents one from putting a receiver in a detached building that is part of the same household please post it. Otherwise it seems that you are making the false assumption and a false accusation that any separate building becomes a separate household.



harsh said:


> The question is one of having service in two structures, one of which hasn't been clearly defined as exclusive use.


No, it isn't. He doesn't lose the entire structure by leasing a portion of it.

The customer has clarified that the area where he wants to put the new receiver IS part of his household. If you don't believe him that is your own problem - please refrain from calling him a liar (or inferring that he is) on our forum. We take people at their word here and the setup he described ... same household on the same property ... IS legit. He's not leasing the area where he wants to put the new receiver. It remains part of his household.


----------



## avmaster (May 30, 2008)

Just add another reciever to your account, there is no problems with doing so, doesn't matter if its 400 or 4000 feet away as long its on the same property. I actually work as a dish contractor, don't listen to some of the mis-information provided here.

As for those telling you that you need a broadband or phone connection, nope, not necessary. are you wanting DVR service in the barn? if not just get a vip211k. 

Doesn't matter if you have a teanant that has their own dish on the barn, you can add your reciver to it. Any tech that goes out there and sees a dish on the barn will do the same. Any time we do a condo complex or apartment and there is a dish available there onsite and within a feasable distance we do the same thing.

The only time there is a problem is if you are trying run different recivers on your account at different physical addresses.


----------



## avmaster (May 30, 2008)

SayWhat? said:


> So, you're saying that the second 722 will need a second dish to actually receive the video, but can be connected to the main house system via wireless internet for the activation and account verification?


neither is necessary. we do not activate through a broadband or phone connection. the phone lines primary use is for PPV, broadband is used for on-demand and other features. There is some mis-information out there suggesting that systems require phone connections or broadband connections, but if that were true then there wouldn't be the millions of people out there that have dish and do not have either, it does in no way effect your service or account.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

avmaster said:


> neither is necessary. we do not activate through a broadband or phone connection. the phone lines primary use is for PPV, broadband is used for on-demand and other features. There is some mis-information out there suggesting that systems require phone connections or broadband connections, but if that were true then there wouldn't be the millions of people out there that have dish and do not have either, it does in no way effect your service or account.


Wrong. The phone line is necessary to verify that all receivers in multi receiver installations are installed at the same address. They don't get too picky on the subject if you only have one receiver, but if the number goes to 3-4 or more they get very picky. Since the OP has 2 receivers already, and wants to add a third, there is a strong potential of problems (disconnection or phone call to verify) if a phone line or internet line is not hooked up to all receivers. This was put in place to avoid the potential of "account stacking" mentioned earlier. Account stacking happens when a person buys multiple recivers and dishes and activates all the receivers under one account and installs them in multiple locations. The phone line/internet connection is the only way that Dish can verify that this is not happening. They are VERY picky on the subject.


----------



## hiero4life (Apr 10, 2008)

I've had this question too. I have 2 houses on a lot one for my family and one for my inlaws, we have 1 utility bill for the property but have 2 separate phone lines. They have Dtv and we have Dish, from what I understand I couldn't add them to my account, is this correct?


----------



## James Long (Apr 17, 2003)

hiero4life said:


> I've had this question too. I have 2 houses on a lot one for my family and one for my inlaws, we have 1 utility bill for the property but have 2 separate phone lines. They have Dtv and we have Dish, from what I understand I couldn't add them to my account, is this correct?


I'm not a lawyer ... I don't work for DISH or DirecTV. I won't pay any penalty that you may incur if you ignore the following information nor reimburse you for any subscription fees that you feel you may pay in error by following said advice.

But the key I see in your description is "two houses". Complete separate living units. Each household requires it's own account. You can't add the neighbor's house to your account.

As far as the utility bill, I've lived in apartments where utilities except phone and cable were included but each apartment was it's own household. I wouldn't say sharing a utility bill makes it one household.

That's my opinion. You have described a situation that calls for two accounts.


----------



## Richard King (Mar 25, 2002)

I agree with your opinion.


----------



## shadough (Dec 31, 2006)

Getting back to the orginal "OP"s question, your A OK. You've got a dish you can hook up to (doesnt matter if its the tenants dish) and you've got a dhcp connection. All you need is the receiver. As already stated, these things need to be kept in mind: you can only have 4 leased tuners on your account, an you'll need an available feed on the dish. I'm not real familiar w/ the HD dish but you might need a multiswitch, DPP44?


----------



## jkane (Oct 12, 2007)

I have a second building that has an old single LNB dish on it pointed at 119. There is a single 501 located there. I don't need all the programming on it, so just seeing 119 is perfect. No problems. It is my owned hardware. I never asked for permission to do it. Never had a problem with it.

It will work fine with a second dish and receiver.


----------



## Mck TSR III (Nov 11, 2009)

Guys this would be considered packing and acc any account that would require a seperate dish will require a seperation of the account. If the install is over useful signal strentgh which is normally defined as 200 total feet would require another dish install even if it is the same physical address. Been working for dish as TSR for over 10 years and worked evt team (Equipment verification team) Before it was moved to Denver.


----------

