no pole, no roof..help!

I don't disagree that removing it from the ground later will do no harm. I can just see that the OP moves out in August and has to dig this pole and cement out of the ground. Nice, hot and humid day and that job will be NO fun.

Before declaring the landlord a "moron" or anything, who's to say he wouldn't agree to an added clause in the lease ? What would be a reasonable $ amount to charge if the tenant fails to remove it ? I'm guessing there'd be no agreement on that.... Whatever the landlord says, it will be too much.

Of course digging it out will be no fun, but if someone wants their Dish service, sometimes they have to sacrafice some time/labor.

Based on the current posts, my guess is the landlord wouldn't be for a added clause to the lease. Sounds like the guy is a prick no matter how nice you are to him.

A reasonable amount could be something the tenant/landlord agreed with before the clause was added and signed upon. Or the clause can simply state the cost will be whatever a handyman would charge to come out and do it (Maybe even the average of 3 quotes). This can be easily done and agreed upon if both parites are level headed. I know (being a landlord myself) that I have no problem agreeing to things like this and coming up with a reasonable arrangements with my tenants.
 
No, his landlord sounds like he owns the property. Have you ever removed a pole mounted in cement that's buried ?? Oh, I'm sure you have.... and it was simple.... I did it once and it wasn't fun. I have to admit, the installer did a FINE job as it was a properly deep hole, below the frost line, as was the cement. I had to dig a hole around the cement thinking I could rock it loose then pick it up. Well, it was too heavy for me. Next I had to break the cement with a hammer (remember, the cement was 2-3' below the surface so a sledge wouldn't reach) and take the pieces out by hand.

Yes he does own the property..Now onm to logistics..I cannot fathom why it is some people have a one dimensional view of problems..I have in the past where extracting a pole isn't possible, done the following..I simply dig a hole several inches below grade, and arund the concrete ..Then I break out the top few inches of concrete and cut the pole below grade...Then fill the hole with soil..Done..30 mins tops..
 
Clearly he doesn't. The landlord owns the property and can make up many rules that the tenants can agree with or disagree with but it doesn't change anything. I'm not saying the landlord's not being unreasonable but he doesn't have to be reasonable either.

Anyway, I don't know what the person I replied to meant for sure about the comment about "one directional point of view" but I took it as "all landlords are morons, pricks, etc". I can't and won't agree with that. If I were a landlord, I wouldn't NOT allow a dish to be mounted on the wall or roof but I would allow a dish to be pole-mounted. One condition though: It has to be reasonably out of sight, i.e. in the backyard preferably. Absolutely no dish mounts in the front yard !
 
Clearly he doesn't. The landlord owns the property and can make up many rules that the tenants can agree with or disagree with but it doesn't change anything. I'm not saying the landlord's not being unreasonable but he doesn't have to be reasonable either.

Anyway, I don't know what the person I replied to meant for sure about the comment about "one directional point of view" but I took it as "all landlords are morons, pricks, etc". I can't and won't agree with that. If I were a landlord, I wouldn't NOT allow a dish to be mounted on the wall or roof but I would allow a dish to be pole-mounted. One condition though: It has to be reasonably out of sight, i.e. in the backyard preferably. Absolutely no dish mounts in the front yard !

What he said was a "one dimensional" view. Which is what the landlord is doing by looking at the situation as nothing but negative. Not trying to look at the issue from other angles to see how both parties can be satisfied.

EDIT: And I believe the FCC's OTARD Rules (FCC Fact Sheet on Placement of Antennas) don't allow a landlord to prohibit the tenant from getting Satellite TV service.

Q: Does the rule apply to residents of rental property?

A: Yes. Effective January 22, 1999, renters may install antennas within their leasehold, which means inside the dwelling or on outdoor areas that are part of the tenant's leased space and which are under the exclusive use or control of the tenant. Typically, for apartments, these areas include balconies, balcony railings, and terraces. For rented single family homes or manufactured homes which sit on rented property, these areas include the home itself and patios, yards, gardens or other similar areas. If renters do not have access to these outside areas, the tenant may install the antenna inside the rental unit. Renters are not required to obtain the consent of the landlord prior to installing an antenna in these areas. The rule does not apply to common areas, such as the roof or the exterior walls of an apartment building. Generally, balconies or patios that are shared with other people or are accessible from other units are not considered to be exclusive use areas.

Q: Are there restrictions that may be placed on residents of rental property?


A: Yes. A restriction necessary to prevent damage to leased property may be reasonable. For example, tenants could be prohibited from drilling holes through exterior walls or through the roof. However, a restriction designed to prevent ordinary wear and tear (e.g., marks, scratches, and minor damage to carpets, walls and draperies) would likely not be reasonable provided the antenna is installed wholly within the antenna user's own exclusive use area. In addition, rental property is subject to the same protection and exceptions to the rule as owned property. Thus, a landlord may impose other types of restrictions that do not impair installation, maintenance or use under the rule. The landlord may also impose restrictions necessary for safety or historic preservation.
 
The Landlord isn't prohibiting a dish...he's just restricting it's location. As Hall has stated, it IS his property, and as such, may deem certain installation procedures as a form of "damage". Hence, landlord imposed restrictions

Now if the landlord was prohibiting a dish, that would fall under OTARD. As a landlord *and* an installer, I can see and appreciate where the landlord is coming from. Someone else stated this idea earlier, and to me it sounds the most reasonable; why not sign a waver (assuming the LL is in agreement with this) saying the pole can be installed in the backyard, but not cemented. If it's done right (smashed end of the pole...and maybe a few bolts sticking out of the side to prevent any spinning) it should hold up for a short-term. A few years perhaps.

Just one installer/landlord's opinion....:)
 
Non pen would be the best bet at a location furthest from the house, once the time comes to remove the non pen then its nothing more than adding some lawn patch to the spot and the grass is replaced. Landlord owns the property and can limit the mounting options but by law can not deny anyone renting the property from having a satellite service provider, he can put a limit on the amount of dishes though.

There are some redneck tricks you can do to minimize the damage to the yard by the non pen ( putting the non pen onto to saw horses just to name one ) but really some kind of non permanent mount other than a bucket would be something to look into.
 
A 1-5/8 inch chain link fence line post fits snuggly over a standard farmer's green "tee" post. Just drive the "tee" post into the ground with a slege hammer or a post driver. I use these often for portable mounts where concrete is prohibited. I even have a leverage tool that allows the post to be literally pulled out of the ground.

Several years, ago, I was a distributor of a portable RV mount that worked on this principle. The mount telescopes and drives the bottom section into the ground like a built in post driver. The top section takes a dish up to a Phase III DirecTV or a Dish500. The top section can be taken off and used to lever the bottom section out of the ground. The only problem is that they sold for about $80. They still make several different types, but they are bulky and ugly. This looks almost exactly like a concreted pole mount.

If you are interested, send me a PM. I still have a couple left.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 0, Members: 0, Guests: 0)

Who Read This Thread (Total Members: 1)