Dish-landlord-legal questions

[justinrdavidson]

Hey everybody,

The situation I fall into is this: I rented a house last August. I asked the landlord if I could have dish network, she agreed, signed the consent papers, and even came during installation and made sure everything was done to her specifications. So now we fast forward one year later. I am now preparing to move from this house in a few weeks. Because I am moving into an apartment I went ahead and cancelled dish service. The cancellation went fine, leased equipment returned no problems. Now as I prepare to move I received an email from my landlord asking when I will have the dishes and cables removed. I had not planned on removing anything because of potential danger to myself (climbing on roof) and potential damage to her house (removing cables). I did inform her that for a fee I understand dish will come out and remove it for her. She believes it is my responsibility to have the dishes and cables removed and that if I do not prior to moving out that she can remove them and charge me the fee out of my deposit. In her words because she gave consent for the install she also gave consent for uninstall which is my duty in her mind. What are my legal rights in this case? I was under the impression she, as the homeowner, owned the dishes and cables and could not legally hold me responsible/charge me for there removal. I need to address this soon and professionally so any advice or websites that address this topic would be really appreciated. Thanks again guys! I really loved my dish service and will be back again soon, just not loving my landlord right now.

-Justin

 

[Dave90000]

Seems like a reasonable request to require you to put the property back in the same condition as it was when you rented it. I am not a lawyer but I believe she can with hold the amount required to restore the property to its previous state from your security deposit.

 

[justinrdavidson]

Seems like a reasonable request to require you to put the property back in the same condition as it was when you rented it. I am not a lawyer but I believe she can with hold the amount required to restore the property to its previous state from your security deposit.

I would understand her wanting the home in the same condition as rented. The question seems to boil down to after installation, who legally owns the dishes and cables on the home? If dish still owns those parts I can understand her assuming I must pay to remove them. However, because dish DOES NOT want those pieces back it leads me to believe they are now property of the homeowner. If they are in fact now legally her property I do not see how I can be charged/penalized for their removal.

 

[iwc5893]

Actually, I believe the equipment is the property of the person receiving the service...not the homeowner. IANAL, so you may want to check with one.

 

[Pen15head]

its tenants like you that make it so landlords do not give permission to future tenants who want dish. the landlord was cool, gave you permission to have a service that did not benefit her or benefit the property. it only benefited you. she did you a favor and allowed you to have her property modified so you could have a service you wanted, not her, but you, and now its unfair that she expects you to set things back the way you received it?

whoever paid for the install is the person who would be responsible for the de-install. and even if dish did not charge out right for the install, it was paid for in your promotion through your monthly bill.

you rank right next to the jerk who borrows your car and gets a parking ticket and sticks it to you since the cars in your name. either be a man and get on top of the scary roof and take down the dish or pay someone else to do it. or let her hire a handy man who knows its coming out of the renters deposit and will charge even more most likely.

thanks for being selfish and ensuring that this landlord will not allow any of her future tenants to have a satellite system installed. the local cable company should send you a gift basket.

 

[justinrdavidson]

its tenants like you that make it so landlords do not give permission to future tenants who want dish. the landlord was cool, gave you permission to have a service that did not benefit her or benefit the property. it only benefited you. she did you a favor and allowed you to have her property modified so you could have a service you wanted, not her, but you, and now its unfair that she expects you to set things back the way you received it?

whoever paid for the install is the person who would be responsible for the de-install. and even if dish did not charge out right for the install, it was paid for in your promotion through your monthly bill.

you rank right next to the jerk who borrows your car and gets a parking ticket and sticks it to you since the cars in your name. either be a man and get on top of the scary roof and take down the dish or pay someone else to do it. or let her hire a handy man who knows its coming out of the renters deposit and will charge even more most likely.

thanks for being selfish and ensuring that this landlord will not allow any of her future tenants to have a satellite system installed. the local cable company should send you a gift basket.

I do not want to get on the "scary" roof because I, not being a professional, do not want to cause any property damage. I understand your opinion and in the end I am not opposed to paying for it. I simply wanted to know who legally owns the dish and wiring to see who it technically belongs to, the landlord of myself.

 

[Sauk Valley Sat]

Your best option would be to point out the obvious in that the house is all set for the next tenant to get dishnetwork without all the trouble she went through the first time. Plus it sounds like she was happy with the original install, she might not be the next time.

 

[Hall]

The landlord didn't sign anything with Dish's name on it, did she ? No... So she doesn't "own" the leftover hardware.

You can probably remove the cabling easily but there will be numerous little holes where all of the cable clamps were. As for the dish itself, you need to get someone to explain to her that it really should be left because the holes will likely never get sealed properly and there will be leaks. Remove the mast but leave the 'foot' or 'base'.

 

[sam_gordon]

I agree with the folks who say you are responsible for getting the house returned to original condition. I'm assuming the landlord doesn't want a dish just sitting on the roof/side of the house for aesthetic reasons. You can ask if she'd be satisfied with pulling the dish & mast off but leaving the base & cables in place. As far as not properly sealing the holes... there's plenty of options at your local Lowe's/Home Depot that you can put in the holes to seal them.

 

[Jim S.]

I can't understand why the landlord would care about a dish being on the house un-used if she didn't care about it being there while it was used. Then again, I don't know why people think dishes are unsightly anyway. Anybody who doesn't want to behave rationally should move to a theocratic country, not harass free people in a free country.

 

[TNGTony]

Because the property belongs to her and she doesn't like it there! It is the tenant's responsibility to leave the property rented as he found it. It is really just that simple.

The rest of the previous statement is complete hogwash and even more intolerant than the intolerance it decries.

See ya
Tony

 

[NickRogers]

Sounds like the landolord is going for the old deposit grab. I 2nd everything TNGTony said about responsibilities and yada, yada. Get it taken down and set it out with the trash, I bet it won't last long on the curb.

Nick

 

[dishcomm]

Hey everybody,

The situation I fall into is this: I rented a house last August. I asked the landlord if I could have dish network, she agreed, signed the consent papers, and even came during installation and made sure everything was done to her specifications. So now we fast forward one year later. I am now preparing to move from this house in a few weeks. Because I am moving into an apartment I went ahead and cancelled dish service. The cancellation went fine, leased equipment returned no problems. Now as I prepare to move I received an email from my landlord asking when I will have the dishes and cables removed. I had not planned on removing anything because of potential danger to myself (climbing on roof) and potential damage to her house (removing cables). I did inform her that for a fee I understand dish will come out and remove it for her. She believes it is my responsibility to have the dishes and cables removed and that if I do not prior to moving out that she can remove them and charge me the fee out of my deposit. In her words because she gave consent for the install she also gave consent for uninstall which is my duty in her mind. What are my legal rights in this case? I was under the impression she, as the homeowner, owned the dishes and cables and could not legally hold me responsible/charge me for there removal. I need to address this soon and professionally so any advice or websites that address this topic would be really appreciated. Thanks again guys! I really loved my dish service and will be back again soon, just not loving my landlord right now.

-Justin

Do nothing.
Unless the letter of permission to install specifically says "you must remove"
you are not bound by any understanding.
IF she chooses to do so she may sue if you do not comply.
BUt she does not have a legal leg to stand on.
Rental leases and the laws that cover them are very specific.
Lastly, inform her that in most states( her responsibility to check although you can too) that if she witholds your security deposit for something not spelled out SPECIFICALLY in the lease, she can be held liable in civil court for TREBLE damages.
That applies in both SC and NC.
I once had a dispute with an apartment manager who wanted to keep part of my deposit because she " had to make some money off what the turn key company was charging her".
At that time I was takng a property manager's licensing course. We studied the SC Landlord and Tenant Act. The law states that this was illegal and if the tenant succesfully sued the court was within it's jurisdiction to award treble damages vs the landlord.
I informed that manager and quoted the law verbatim.
I got my deposit back in full.
Let me put your mind at ease.
I used to play baseball in 30 and over league. One of my teamates was a circuit court judge. Most of his cases were landlord/tenant disputes. We were chatting in the dugout on one of my many inquiries about the law( I am a bit of a law buff) and I asked about this stuff.
He told me that 90% of lanlord/tenant cases end up in favor of the tenant.
Check you lease carefully.
Again if the lease does not specifically say "must remove" or words to that effect, "her understanding" means nothing.
If she claims that "she told you and understood that if", she has no leg to stand oin.
That is tanatamount to changing the terms of a contract during the term of that contract. You can't do that without consent of the other party( you).
And if she claims "we had a verbal agreeemnt", she must prove that based on the preponderance of evidence. Evidence she does not have. Since she has nothing in writing nor does she have any tape recording of the alleged agreement.
for what it's worth I have found the SC LAndlord and tenant act....
I have found some things that may have been an interst to you. It may not apply in your state. But it's a start.
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t27c040.htm....specifically under "Notice"...
read these sections as they appear to apply to your situation.,
SECTION 27-40-240. Notice.
SECTION 27-40-410. Security deposits; prepaid rent.
I could not find anything on changes ot the lease and such. Perhaps you can google "contract law residential leases" for your state.
I find it improbable that any state would not have a law that woulkd allow a contract to be changed midstream wihtout written consent of both parties to the agreement.

 

[Barry Erick]

Sorry, but I would think the phrase "return property in the condition it was" would cover the dish and she would have a legal leg to stand on But also saying the next tenant might want a dish and please leave it to that and if the tennant does not want it, then take it.

 

[tonybroadway]

Take it down and sell it on ebay.

 

[sbsi]

Tell Dish to remove it. If you bought the protection plan, you should be fine.

 

[Pepper]

If it was me I would do my best to convince the landlord that having the dish preinstalled on the house increases its value to a potential renter who might also be a current or future dish network customer.

Heck, if I owned a rental house, I would put both E* and D* equipment on it and use that for a sales point!

If the landlord won't budge, find a buddy who wants a free dish and have him come get it. Advertise it on freecycle, there's sure to be somebody who wants to come remove it for you.

 

[SnowVan]

As a landlord myself, I don't understand why someone would just think it was ok to leave it there.

If a tenant of mine got permission to use a dish, I would be absolutely 100% against them leaving without taking it off themselves, however they wish to proceed.

I want my property in the same condition it was when it was rented, excluding naturally wear/tear.

Now, since I am a lawyer, I would have put that into the conditions to start with but some don't and that is where problems can start.

As demonized as many landlords are around this country, tenants can be just as bad if not worse to deal with a LOT of the time. People really think it is ok to damage property and leave...and then throw their hands up when the bill comes for their damage.

 

[Hall]

As demonized as many landlords are around this country, tenants can be just as bad if not worse to deal with a LOT of the time.

That's because all landlords are filthy rich... :-D They can afford it.

I jest, of course. My parents and brother are both landlords, for the record.

 

[TheWGP]

Saw something similar to this in a housing court in Ohio... the dispute was over a landlord trying to basically rip off this lady's deposit as some landlords (but by no means all) are wont to do. One of the things he listed was removal of DirecTV equipment and cables, and listed it as a $250 charge (along with other things, against a $1000 deposit).

The judge essentially told the landlord that because he signed the paper permitting the installation (yeah, the lady got that in writing and claimed the landlord was there for the install, though he denied that - unclear what really happened) he was stuck with it, because it's a "semipermanent installation" that would generate holes in the roof were it removed, which the landlord HAD to realize when it was installed... this isn't like a tenant putting up some pictures in the wall, after all! Unclear how this would've shaken out had the satellite been the ONLY issue in play, because this landlord, from what I saw, really was pretty much a no-account scumbag who wouldn't fix anything, so the judge wasn't going to give him any latitude.


(note: I was there as a legal intern, and this is completely anecdotal, but there are genuine differences on this issue, not least because of the damage generated by removal).

Just as a humorous aside, and perhaps explaining this judge's attitude, I was told by my supervising atty that the same judge once made a landlord take possession of a ratty, broken-down "shed" that some tenant had built - he counted it as a "property improvement!" As the story goes, to add insult to injury, he forwarded a 'courtesy copy' of his ruling on that issue to the county auditor to be incorporated into property tax if necessary... probably a bit over the line, but makes for a funny story!