Apartment Complex That Forbids Satellite Installation - Interesting Case

[blurryhaze312]

Hello everyone.

First, let me start by saying that I've read through quite a few threads on here related to the same subject to see if I could have my question answered. I've read over the OTARD regulation and completely understand that it is within my right to install a satellite dish and the MDU can't prohibit this so long as I abide by certain guidelines - no drilling, can't eclipse the space of a patio, etc - and install it in an exclusive use area - in this case, my back patio which can only be accessed through my apartment.

I will be moving into my first apartment in about 3 weeks and knew upfront that the complex provided renters with only one TV/Internet choice: some Mom 'n Pop "cable company" that acquires a Dish Network signal and then pumps it into all of the properties they own in the area. I was fine with that at first because we love the place and I figured it was within their rights as owners to restrict the service for what would be obvious reasons. In fact, we love the place so much that I ignored the fact that their Dish Network feed (admitted to me multiple times) would cost $20 more per month on each package due to extra fees and more expensive services. It wasn't until this week that I found out about the OTARD regulations and that I actually had a choice should my back patio have LOS.

I just had a not-so-lovely discussion with my soon-to-be property manager over the phone and one of her office lackeys. I first called and politely inquired about any restrictions for installing satellites (knowing full well what she'd say) and the office assistant sternly informed me that I had no choice but take what they provided. She brushed off my sob story of being a current Dish subscriber and said she was sorry but that I had no choice. I then, still politely, asked her if the management was aware of the FCC regulation prohibiting them from not permitting my installation. She hung up.

I called back and got the property manager (who must have been listening in the whole time) and said she was fully aware of the law and that it didn't matter; they were a special case and the regulation didn't apply to them and that it was written into their lease that you couldn't install anything. I calmly asked her to clarify and she said that since they were a private property, that they were within their rights to deny your installation. I asked if that even included in my exclusive use area on the back patio and she said it did include that area as they consider the private patios attached to their units as common areas. At least there's no conflicting terms there.

Where I'm foggy on the OTARD, and where I might have an issue pressing my case, is as follows:

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 person would be entitled to receive service from a specific provider, not simply a provider 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.

As I said, they own the provider that brings in the Dish feed. Is this considered a central antenna, and if so, does this prohibit me from installing my own? My interpretation would be no, based on points 1 and 3 as I'm forced into their service of choice and it is incredibly more expensive to maintain annually. Not only that, but even though it is a Dish feed, I don't get any promos or specials from Dish -or ISpeed for that matter - making the prices even higher. All told, my bill through ISpeed will be $420 more annually based on price increases, lack of actual Dish promos and the lack of the Free HD For Life campaign (I wasn't going to purchase HD through them anyways, but the cost goes into the calculation based on the fact that it's free through Dish).

No matter the responses I get here, I see that I have three options:

- Take what they give me
- Push my case at the risk of having them make up a bogus claim come expiration of my lease and refuse to resign me
- Split my parents monthly cable bill and purchase a Slingbox to stream my TV to us, even if it means going through the hassle of hooking up a laptop to the TV every time we want to watch it -OR- buy my own service and have it installed at my parents family-owned place of business...same result really​

Really, I don't know that I have much choice in the matter if I don't want to get evicted come time when the first lease expires. Illegal or not, this is the same situation at every complex we looked at in the area, so we're going to have this battle no matter where we go...it's just that we like this apartment itself. There is no "Well you chose to live here" quotient as every situation would be the same, and this city is located the best for our work travel needs going in two different directions. Plus the manager of this property has a reputation of being a real witch, so I'd rather her not treat us like trash for the next year.

I suppose what I'm asking is if you all have any other alternatives or legal protections that would make fighting their "rules" a non-issue when it comes time to sign a new lease. Or, perhaps, a complete **LEGAL** work-around to their restrictions, like using a Slingbox to broadcast a paid-for service in from a different location over the internet.

 

[pabeader]

i believe there is a sling catcher device that connects directly to tv so you wouldn't have to use laptop.

some people have had luck shooting through the window and out to the satellites.

if you use a balcony mount (5 gal bucket) there really isn't any thing they CAN say. even if they think they can.

 

[blurryhaze312]

i believe there is a sling catcher device that connects directly to tv so you wouldn't have to use laptop.

some people have had luck shooting through the window and out to the satellites.

if you use a balcony mount (5 gal bucket) there really isn't any thing they CAN say. even if they think they can.

Thanks for the reply. However...

I know about the Sling Catcher but I can't find it for anything less than $600!

Again, I know they can't say anything now, but I want to continue to live here after the first lease agreement ends.

 

[pabeader]

really it shouldn't be a problem. it's just a bucket of cement after all. no actual holes drilled or anything.

 

[blurryhaze312]

really it shouldn't be a problem. it's just a bucket of cement after all. no actual holes drilled or anything.

You and I both know this, but I still don't want to give them a reason to make up an excuse as to why they won't renew our lease.

 

[Dah-Henny]

blurry, I suppose that you will have to decide what takes priority for you, even though the law is on your side concerning your exclusive use area.

 

[rglore]

really it shouldn't be a problem. it's just a bucket of cement after all. no actual holes drilled or anything.

Mount it low (cut off the mast elbow, bolt to plate or stick in cement), put a table over it with a skirt and no one will ever see it.

 

[Mr Tony]

I'm partially confused

Does the apt complex have some larger dishes on the roof and the Dish Network system is a MDU setup? I've seen that where the apartment complex puts 2 36" dishes on the roof (for 110 & 119....this is before HD) and then they didnt need dishes scattered across everywhere

As for the patio....if its your EXCLUSIVE area then OTARD is on your side. They may say no holes in the walls but OTARD protects you on the install

 

[R0ss]

This place must either be the taj mahal or dirt cheap for you to be willing to put up with this crap. I know you mentioned the location and that you really like the apartment, but you also mentioned that the property manager or landlord has a reputation for being a witch.
Now I ask you if they are so willing to break the law with providing TV, what other laws are they willing to break? Are you sure they are rebroadcasting Dish legally? How well do they respond when the heat/AC, hot water, or stove breaks down? Sounds to me like they will make every effort to blame the tenant which means money out of your pocket...
YOu didn't mention if they require you to take internet service from a specific provider too.
Good luck

Ross

 

[dishcomm]

Hello everyone.

First, let me start by saying that I've read through quite a few threads on here related to the same subject to see if I could have my question answered. I've read over the OTARD regulation and completely understand that it is within my right to install a satellite dish and the MDU can't prohibit this so long as I abide by certain guidelines - no drilling, can't eclipse the space of a patio, etc - and install it in an exclusive use area - in this case, my back patio which can only be accessed through my apartment.

I will be moving into my first apartment in about 3 weeks and knew upfront that the complex provided renters with only one TV/Internet choice: some Mom 'n Pop "cable company" that acquires a Dish Network signal and then pumps it into all of the properties they own in the area. I was fine with that at first because we love the place and I figured it was within their rights as owners to restrict the service for what would be obvious reasons. In fact, we love the place so much that I ignored the fact that their Dish Network feed (admitted to me multiple times) would cost $20 more per month on each package due to extra fees and more expensive services. It wasn't until this week that I found out about the OTARD regulations and that I actually had a choice should my back patio have LOS.

I just had a not-so-lovely discussion with my soon-to-be property manager over the phone and one of her office lackeys. I first called and politely inquired about any restrictions for installing satellites (knowing full well what she'd say) and the office assistant sternly informed me that I had no choice but take what they provided. She brushed off my sob story of being a current Dish subscriber and said she was sorry but that I had no choice. I then, still politely, asked her if the management was aware of the FCC regulation prohibiting them from not permitting my installation. She hung up.

I called back and got the property manager (who must have been listening in the whole time) and said she was fully aware of the law and that it didn't matter; they were a special case and the regulation didn't apply to them and that it was written into their lease that you couldn't install anything. I calmly asked her to clarify and she said that since they were a private property, that they were within their rights to deny your installation. I asked if that even included in my exclusive use area on the back patio and she said it did include that area as they consider the private patios attached to their units as common areas. At least there's no conflicting terms there.

Where I'm foggy on the OTARD, and where I might have an issue pressing my case, is as follows:

As I said, they own the provider that brings in the Dish feed. Is this considered a central antenna, and if so, does this prohibit me from installing my own? My interpretation would be no, based on points 1 and 3 as I'm forced into their service of choice and it is incredibly more expensive to maintain annually. Not only that, but even though it is a Dish feed, I don't get any promos or specials from Dish -or ISpeed for that matter - making the prices even higher. All told, my bill through ISpeed will be $420 more annually based on price increases, lack of actual Dish promos and the lack of the Free HD For Life campaign (I wasn't going to purchase HD through them anyways, but the cost goes into the calculation based on the fact that it's free through Dish).

No matter the responses I get here, I see that I have three options:

- Take what they give me
- Push my case at the risk of having them make up a bogus claim come expiration of my lease and refuse to resign me
- Split my parents monthly cable bill and purchase a Slingbox to stream my TV to us, even if it means going through the hassle of hooking up a laptop to the TV every time we want to watch it -OR- buy my own service and have it installed at my parents family-owned place of business...same result really​

Really, I don't know that I have much choice in the matter if I don't want to get evicted come time when the first lease expires. Illegal or not, this is the same situation at every complex we looked at in the area, so we're going to have this battle no matter where we go...it's just that we like this apartment itself. There is no "Well you chose to live here" quotient as every situation would be the same, and this city is located the best for our work travel needs going in two different directions. Plus the manager of this property has a reputation of being a real witch, so I'd rather her not treat us like trash for the next year.

I suppose what I'm asking is if you all have any other alternatives or legal protections that would make fighting their "rules" a non-issue when it comes time to sign a new lease. Or, perhaps, a complete **LEGAL** work-around to their restrictions, like using a Slingbox to broadcast a paid-for service in from a different location over the internet.

this is a case of "see you in court"..In other words the apt mgment seems to be aware of the OTARD regs but the mgr does not care. The deal is they are daring anyone to push the issue. Of course few people have the money and time required to battle an apt mgment company over tv. More often than not, the tennant unwilling to make waves or become a known complainer simply gives up.
Now, be advised that when you took the time to read the lease contract you noticed the prohibition to satellite antennas. You did that, did you not?. Once you signed that contract you agreed to all terms and conditions. You cannot call "do over". One may say the terms were unfair. You could challenge that in court. Again, time and money. The only way a contract can be nullified is if in the opinion of a judge, the terms were "unconscionable"(example would be if the contract gave the management the right to inspect your unit 24/7/365 without prior notice) or the agreement does not provide "equal consideration". In other words both parties reach an agreement that satisfies both.
The whole issue boils down ot whether or not you wish to open this can of worms. Then even if you think you are right, a judge may have a pro- management bias, rules in the apt complex favor and try proving the judge was not fair, good luck.
As a last resort you could invoke, "it is better to beg for forgiveness than ask for approval"...In other words install the dish and let the chips fall where they may.
Oh, one thing. You'll have a tough time getting a tech to install without a letter of permission in your possession.

 

[Dah-Henny]

Now, be advised that when you took the time to read the lease contract you noticed the prohibition to satellite antennas. You did that, did you not?. Once you signed that contract you agreed to all terms and conditions. You cannot call "do over".

Seems to me that the contract would be null & void if it violated federal law, even if both parties signed it, IMHO.

 

[dishcomm]

Seems to me that the contract would be null & void if it violated federal law, even if both parties signed it, IMHO.

Yes, one could look at it that way. However the only thing that matters is what one can prove.

 

[blurryhaze312]

Does the apt complex have some larger dishes on the roof and the Dish Network system is a MDU setup? I've seen that where the apartment complex puts 2 36" dishes on the roof (for 110 & 119....this is before HD) and then they didnt need dishes scattered across everywhere

No. From what I can gather, the management for this complex and the two others they own are the parent company - or are a sister company under a larger parent - of the Telcom company called ISpeed. They force you to use their Phone, Internet and TV. To me, it sounds like they have an exclusivity agreement with Dish where they provide all of their owned communities with a Dish signal. Each of their three communities are at least 20 minutes apart and are all supplied by ISpeed, so no, they don't have dishes on the premises. They are a "cable company" that provides a Dish signal.

This place must either be the taj mahal or dirt cheap for you to be willing to put up with this crap. I know you mentioned the location and that you really like the apartment, but you also mentioned that the property manager or landlord has a reputation for being a witch.
Now I ask you if they are so willing to break the law with providing TV, what other laws are they willing to break? Are you sure they are rebroadcasting Dish legally? How well do they respond when the heat/AC, hot water, or stove breaks down? Sounds to me like they will make every effort to blame the tenant which means money out of your pocket...
YOu didn't mention if they require you to take internet service from a specific provider too.
Good luck

Ross

Thanks for your input, Ross. From everything I've heard, the manager is just a witch in general, not that she exactly goes out of her way to make your life miserable. I just don't want to give her a reason to go out of her way, especially when she's been very pleasant to me so far.

I've talked to someone who has lived there before and they said they had nothing but a good experience. Prompt service when needed, no major complaints. The only issues I've ever heard from any of their communities is this issue with ISpeed.

As for our choice to put up with them, we are in a suburb of Pittsburgh where we don't get much choice in available, nice renting options. I work next door to the airport and she works an hour or so north of the city. The general location in between the two really limited our choices of properties. Not only this, but if you know Pittsburgh, you know the highways suck. We could have picked a different location that was perfect for what we needed in the TV/net area, but I would have had to battle the awful highways and tunnels right in the city. I'd rather deal with this issue than hours of extra traffic every drive.

Text deleted to shorten this post.

Exactly. Everything you said is exactly what I was thinking. I could push the issue and win, but I don't have the money to take it to court if necessary. It's just not worth it, which is why I'm looking for an alternative such as the use of a Slingbox or a legal protection to keep them from evicting me or not renewing my lease when it expires should I, in fact, push the envelope.

As for the lease, we haven't even signed it yet, so that's no issue. However, even still, would I be wrong to assume that an FCC regulation would overrule a lease agreement?

 

[pabeader]

it would and has in all cases that we know of.

 

[Bob Haller]

Hey I am from pittsburghs north hills but travel all over the tri state area.

Some years ago TCI ticked off a bunch of apartment communities big time. This may have led to what your seeing today, private systems.

If you can get the chanels you want then look at the 240 bucks extra a year as part of the rent, is the rents still affordable?/

 

[wallyhts]

I was in an apartment before buying a house a few years back.

The complex had all kinds of crap you had to do like a $500 deposit.

I just put the dish up and they started bitching my response sue me. I never heard a word about it again.

Tell them to go to hell just pay your rent on time every time.
If they will not resign your lease just stay and let them start the eviction process you will have your day in court in front of the judge don't act like a lawyer just tell your side.

How old is the complex does or did it have lead paint did you sign a lead paint amendment?

 

[AlaJoe]

I look at this the same way I look at a restaurant that charges $2.50 for a soda or Ice tea. They are artificially keeping the price of the Entrees low by inflating the price of the drinks and it works because 9 out of ten people are not going to just get water. This is the same the the apartment complex is doing they are artificially keeping the rent lower buy charging extra for tv service. Look at it like the rent is really $20.00 higher than advertised.

 

[JohnL]

I could push the issue and win, but I don't have the money to take it to court if necessary.

You don't need any money to take the complex to court. Have your Dish installed, they will likely serve you will papers to appear in court. March into the preceding with the FCC OTARD rules when the Judge asks for your argument provide the FCC OTARD rules to the judge.

Within minutes you will have a ruling in your favor, any and all Court costs will be the responsibility of the losing party, CASE CLOSED.

BTW, it does not matter in the least that the complex has the language in your lease regarding the restriction of the antennas, nor does it matter that you signed it. The simple fact is that blanket restrictions of Dish's under 1 meter or any sized OTA antennas are STRICTLY ILLEGAL, and are un-enforceable in court.

John

 

[JeremyL]

Seems to me that the contract would be null & void if it violated federal law, even if both parties signed it, IMHO.

Yes, you can't enforce an illegal contract, no matter how many people agreed and signed it.

 

[Bob Haller]

use bucket mount, and buy a cheap receiver and activate, no contract so if the apartment gives you a really bad time you just cancel. no contracts to muck with.

if you need a temp receiver let me know i may have something around

I helped someone wanting dish awhile ago he was moving to a new townhouse community. I met the management at the near finished home. he had only final papers to sign. I took along a copy of the federal law management who had a complete prohibition for sat dishes claimed thir HOA overrode federal law.

they agreed to the 2 dish install. he wanted cricket or something. management was very unhappy.

I enjoyed therir unhappiness