Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

'No Satellite Dish' rule in Apartment Building - Advice?

  • 09-08-2007 11:04am
    #1
    Dr Pepper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 841 ✭✭✭


    Hi Folks,

    I've just ordered a Sky+ installation which will be happening Saturday week. I moved into a new apartment building a couple of weeks ago and one of the conditions/rules of the management company is that satellite dishes are not allowed to be erected on the exterior of the building. This rule has been reiterated and stressed in documentation I have received since moving in. There are, however, satellite dishes on I'd say more than half of the occupied apartments at the moment.

    - Anybody know how serious management companies are about this rule?
    - Is there any chance we will all be forced to remove the dishes?
    - Are there any reasonable alternatives available? If so, is there any extra cost or performance implications and do Sky provide them?

    From what I understand, the Management Company is there to serve the apartment owners, not necessarily tell them what to do (although keep a certain level of control - noise, rubbish, etc). If none of the owners object strongly to dishes, is there any reason the management company should make a fuss about it?

    Thanks,
    Brian


«1345

Comments

  • #2
    machiavellianme
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,667 ✭✭✭✭machiavellianme


    Maybe you could get a digiglobe?

    http://www.ddelec.com/digiglobe.htm


  • #3
    Dr Pepper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 841 ✭✭✭Dr Pepper


    That looks great thanks machiavellianme, but I've just found it on another site with the price quoted - £250 GBP - Gasp!

    Just found it for £149 GBP on 2 other websites. Still though, not really interested in spending that kinda money!


  • #4
    VERYinterested
    Closed Accounts Posts: 923 ✭✭✭VERYinterested


    I remember seeing a newspaper ad recently for DID, I think, and they had some alternative to Satellite dishes for Apartment dwellers and it looked like a picnic table. Maybe give DID a bell, I can't even remember how much it was, sorry it's not much help to you!!


  • #5
    Dr Pepper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 841 ✭✭✭Dr Pepper


    Thanks VERYinterested, I'll check that out if needs be..
    Meanwhile, my brother-in-law has just emailed me the following 3 links.. Hmmm:

    http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/01/913&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/cm/617/617113/617113en.pdf

    http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/cm/601/601591/601591en.pdf


  • #6
    dade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,178 ✭✭✭dade


    Dr Pepper wrote:

    - Anybody know how serious management companies are about this rule?
    - Is there any chance we will all be forced to remove the dishes?
    - Are there any reasonable alternatives available? If so, is there any extra cost or performance implications and do Sky provide them?



    Thanks,
    Brian

    I know of two estates in Dublin that had issues with management over them, one was in the Nothside people. Can't remember the name but management wrote to them about the dishes and also about people having cloths lines erected. these letters where sent to owners in both apartments AND houses. so they where coming down on people with gardens hanging out cloths :rolleyes:

    In Waterside in swords i believe a similar issue arose about the dishes only someone went to consumer rights or some monopoly crowd and where told it may be a breach of their consumer rights to stop them having dishes as they had a right to choose AND as the developer had entered into a prior agreement with some service provider for TV etc they where creating a monopoly which may be again illegal. personally I'm inclined to agree with this.

    I live in Holywell in the Malahide/swords area and apartment owners are also restricted like yourself in relation to dishes but no one takes any notice. Some other residents complain but f them. I think you should be allowed to choose.

    from a planning POV my understanding is they can not be erected to the front of a building and must be under 2M in size (which most domestic ones are) anything other than that and you require planning permission.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Dr Pepper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 841 ✭✭✭Dr Pepper


    dade wrote:
    AND as the developer had entered into a prior agreement with some service provider for TV etc they where creating a monopoly which may be again illegal.

    Seems to be the same story in my case. I wonder if that is the reasoning behind the dish ban ?? Magnet have the whole place wired with fiber to the home. They have installed 10 network points around the apartment and have a box (which is locked) beside the fuse board where all the cables are terminated. Seems a bit odd, Magnet having a locked box like that in my apartment that I paid for. I'm not that bothered though - Handy enough having the whole place pre-wired for network and a friend of mine working in Magnet has already opened the box for me ;)


  • #8
    fluppet
    Closed Accounts Posts: 232 ✭✭fluppet


    Demand a communal satellite dish installation - we have one in our apartment building. You just need one dish on the roof. Ours uses SMATV, but I believe there are other options. Any satellite dish installer company should be able to set it up.


  • #9
    Dr Pepper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 841 ✭✭✭Dr Pepper


    fluppet wrote:
    Demand a communal satellite dish installation - we have one in our apartment building. You just need one dish on the roof. Ours uses SMATV, but I believe there are other options. Any satellite dish installer company should be able to set it up.

    I'm confident enough to go ahead now with the Sky installation with the backup of the above linked EU legislation. If the management company would rather a communal dish, I guess they can organise it themselves!


  • #10
    wil
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,188 ✭✭✭wil


    You might like to take a look at the previous discussion that effectively concluded your right to have access to a satellite dish wherever you are living under EU law.
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055124066&page=3
    Spocketys template may be of use if the management company get shirty.
    Hagar who has a similar problem has indicated he too is likely to fight his management company, if you go same route maybe ye could start a thread on how you go about it and how you get on. Combine your efforts, if enough people do so with common sense intact there is no good reason to lose.

    The flat dishes you refer to above from DID were not effective in France and may or may not be adequate in Ireland but are expensive (299 in DID)
    Good luck

    Adendum - the full 17 page text of the EU commissions publication is at
    http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/doc/info_centre/communic_reports/satellite_dish/antenna_en.pdf
    Thanks for the extra German case link.
    see http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055128143
    for my comments on the Dutchmans case which are similar here


  • #11
    Dr Pepper
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 841 ✭✭✭Dr Pepper


    Thanks again Wil, a mind of information as usual. I just had a good read of that thread.

    I will keep you posted on events but I don't imagine much will come of it. It just seems like bullying and, in my cynicism, I believe may have as much to do with keeping a 'deal' with the non-satellite TV provider as anything else. I just wonder if there are genuine concerns among my fellow residents about the appearance.
    The dishes in place are all small black Sky ones so the fact that they are all uniform helps a lot in terms of the visual impact.


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    property
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1 ✭property


    i am a property manager and would advice anyone attempting to put up a satellite dish on your apartment not to... it will end up costing you money.. most property managment companies will issue you with a 7 day notice to remove the dish or they will remove them. The normal cost of this could be anything between €70 and €150 depending on the managment company. My advice.... get together with your board of directors, discuss your budget options and decide what funds you have available and what items for your community are of improtance. If the funds are available you can request your managment company to put in a communal dish - this can cost anything from €30000 to €50000 for the complex, again depending on how many apartments there are and how new the complex is... if funds are low, then you need to convince everyone to stick to NTL... or get an NTL box GOOD LUCK


  • #13
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,493 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    property wrote: »
    i am a property manager and would advice anyone attempting to put up a satellite dish on your apartment not to... it will end up costing you money.. most property managment companies will issue you with a 7 day notice to remove the dish or they will remove them. The normal cost of this could be anything between €70 and €150 depending on the managment company. My advice.... get together with your board of directors, discuss your budget options and decide what funds you have available and what items for your community are of improtance. If the funds are available you can request your managment company to put in a communal dish - this can cost anything from €30000 to €50000 for the complex, again depending on how many apartments there are and how new the complex is... if funds are low, then you need to convince everyone to stick to NTL... or get an NTL box GOOD LUCK

    This is standard Management Company horse ****, no offence.

    Did you even read the EU directive linked to above? Management companies are in breach of EU laws on freedom and movement of goods and services if they attempt to restrict a citizens right to receive satellite television. It's as simple as that.

    A blanket "no satellite dishes" rule in lease agreements of complex 'house rules' is illegal and should be ignored.

    A communal dish install costing 50,000? Is that sheckels or guineas? :|


  • #14
    Hagar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,793 ✭✭✭✭Hagar


    wil wrote: »
    Hagar who has a similar problem has indicated he too is likely to fight his management company...
    Adendum - the full 17 page text of the EU commissions publication is at
    http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/doc/info_centre/communic_reports/satellite_dish/antenna_en.pdf
    Thanks for the extra German case link.
    see http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055128143
    for my comments on the Dutchmans case which are similar here

    Just an update. the Management Company came back to me with another demand to remove my dish. I sent them back a PFO letter which quotes from the French equivalents of the documents above plus links to the relevant French laws where the above has been enacted. I haven't heard from them in almost a month. :D


  • #15
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,493 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    That's cool.. though maybe they are spending time coming up with a knockout punch for you!

    I think based on the Dutch guy's case, it seems that the correct procedure when you are asked to remove your dish, is to reply in writing to your Management Company, and request from them in writing what their justification is for making you remove your dish. Only armed with that information can you then fight it.

    I think we all already know what the reasons are generally.
    It is either to protect a monopoly cable provider in the development, or it is to respect aesthetics. Neither of those are grounds for a blanket ban if my interpretation of the EU's documents on it is correct.


  • #16
    Hagar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,793 ✭✭✭✭Hagar


    Thanks for the encouraging words.:p

    I've been through the early stages where they tell me to take it down and they quote their rules. Then I took it down and went through the motions of asking their permission to put it back up. They give me permission with impossible conditions. I respond with photos of 11 other dishes within the complex and reapply for permission which they again grant with almost the same conditions. I spot a chink in their conditions and put mine back up. They tell me to take it down again. That brings us up to my previous post.

    Just as an aside they supply the six basic French TV channels and TV Monte Carlo on cable. The cost of this is minimal and is included in the basic charges.


  • #17
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,493 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    That's good.. pity you took it down though.. I reckon the onus should be on the Management Company to prove a case for you to take it down, and not on you to prove a case for being allowed to put it up as it is a fundamental human right...


  • #18
    Borzoi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,876 ✭✭✭Borzoi


    spockety wrote: »
    That's good.. pity you took it down though.. I reckon the onus should be on the Management Company to prove a case for you to take it down, and not on you to prove a case for being allowed to put it up as it is a fundamental human right...


    Just a minor point - as an apartment 'owner' - you're actually just a leaseholder. The external property belongs to the management company. So they get to decide what may or may not be attached to their property.


  • #19
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,493 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    And as an apartment owner, you ARE a shareholder of the Management Company.
    So you do have a vested interest in the external property.


  • #20
    Ulsterman 1690
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,242 ✭✭✭Ulsterman 1690


    you can request your managment company to put in a communal dish - this can cost anything from €30000 to €50000 for the complex

    The phrase "bend over" springs to mind :rolleyes:


  • #21
    ted1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,658 ✭✭✭✭ted1


    you need planning permission for a satelite dish. so you can be forced to remove it


  • Advertisement
  • #22
    Tony
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,336 ✭✭✭✭Tony


    ted1 wrote: »
    you need planning permission for a satelite dish. so you can be forced to remove it

    You need to do some research before posting as this is not the case for every situation.

    Desktop PC Boards discount code on https://www.satellite.ie/ is boards.ie



  • #23
    Tony
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,336 ✭✭✭✭Tony


    property wrote: »
    If the funds are available you can request your managment company to put in a communal dish - this can cost anything from €30000 to €50000 for the complex, again depending on how many apartments there are and how new the complex is... if funds are low, then you need to convince everyone to stick to NTL... or get an NTL box GOOD LUCK


    Did someone quote you these figures? Seem way above what I would consider reasonable

    Desktop PC Boards discount code on https://www.satellite.ie/ is boards.ie



  • #24
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,555 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    ted1 wrote: »
    you need planning permission for a satelite dish. so you can be forced to remove it

    Rarely true. You need permission if the building is listed, or the dish is over 1 metre, or its a second dish per dwelling, or is on the front - if its on the back, under 1 metre, and on its own it needs no permission.

    In the UK you're allowed two dishes, one 1M one 60cm (or lower), rear-facing; and assuming you're not in a "conservation area".

    50k for a communal system is daylight robbery unless you're talking about wiring a massive complex - a single apartment block wouldn't come close to that.


  • #25
    watty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    Communal works out about 200 Euro a person.

    All Agreed Myob.


  • #26
    markpb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,342 ✭✭✭markpb


    Our MA talked to several companies about fitting communal dishes in my estate and got prices over €150,00 for installation for a 5 block, 321 unit estate mainly because the buildings don't have provision for internal cabling so €50,000 for a smaller estate could be reasonable enough.


  • #27
    Tony
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,336 ✭✭✭✭Tony


    If access routes have to be created from scratch then yes it will be more expensive but in most cases some of the existing wiring can be used. 200 per apartment would be ok if you are doing it at the build stage but a figure of 4 to 500 per apartment I think is more realistic on an existing build with cable route access. Its just a pity that no consideration is given to this at the design stage. It has serious consequences for the apartment dwellers.

    Desktop PC Boards discount code on https://www.satellite.ie/ is boards.ie



  • #28
    L1011
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 69,555 ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Unless the builders have used atrociously poor cables or a terrible layout on whatever system is installed - there has to at least be a communal aerial system surely - it should be reusable. Won't be able to provide dual feeds for Sky+ over it, though.

    If its cable thats in to all the apartments, well, it'll be difficult unless you can use the same ducts/cabinets as UPC have...


  • #29
    markpb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,342 ✭✭✭markpb


    I don't know the exact details of my estate but it was pre-wired by Eircom and NTL. I'm not sure there's any spare cabling, ducting might be available but I wouldn't hold my breath. There was also an annual service charge but I can't remember how much or what for.


  • #30
    wil
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,188 ✭✭✭wil


    Hagar, great to hear the positive update, was going to ask.
    I hope you are getting everything in writing from them. As spockety mentioned, as in the previous cases the onus seems to be on you to prove that they refused to abide by the Freedom of Services.
    If I read you correctly your posts are in reverse order and you do still have the dish up.
    Hagar wrote:
    They give me permission with impossible conditions..
    That sounds in direct contravention of the Act. Any conditions have to be the exception.
    They must be applied in a non-discriminatory way; (seem like they are allowing 11 others but not yours)
    They must be Justified - are they?
    The restrictions must be duly substantiated, considerations real, not merely a pretext.

    I dont think there can be a knockout blow in this case, the laws are clear enough, but threats of long protracted court proceedings would probably knock out most people and thats what they rely on. Take heart from the US situation, if capitalist might didnt win there then its unlikely to do better in France.

    (If every dish owner made a donation towards your incidental legal costs by depositing in to Hagars Dish Rights in Complexes fund henceforth known as Hagars DRinCs fund then we could get this stated for once and for all in case law or at least at the Bar:D)

    Perhaps after reading the docs they are thinking smart-derrière and moved on to harassing someone else.:)


  • Advertisement
  • #31
    Hagar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,793 ✭✭✭✭Hagar


    wil wrote: »
    Perhaps after reading the docs they are thinking smart-derrière and moved on to harassing someone else.:)
    That is exactly my thinking. BTW I even bought a transparent acrylic dish to minimise the visual impact. Also the installation has not damaged the exterior of the building in any way, there are no holes in the walls, I used a clamp system to attach it to the bars on the balcony. The cable passes through the exterior wall using a small pre-existing hole, I think a previous owner had an electrical cable running onto the balcony for something or other.


  • #32
    watty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 32,417 ✭✭✭✭watty


    Tony wrote: »
    If access routes have to be created from scratch then yes it will be more expensive but in most cases some of the existing wiring can be used. 200 per apartment would be ok if you are doing it at the build stage but a figure of 4 to 500 per apartment I think is more realistic on an existing build with cable route access. Its just a pity that no consideration is given to this at the design stage. It has serious consequences for the apartment dwellers.

    Yes. agree 100%


  • #33
    markpb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,342 ✭✭✭markpb


    Our estate has a blanket ban on dishes because a lot of the residents and a majority of the owner-elected board of directors want it that way*. I can't imagine any action being taken against an owner for having a dish inside or a digiglobe or something similarly unobtrustive in their balcony.

    To install a communal dish in my estate, we'd have to charge everyone €500 to cover the installation and an extra fee each year for maintenance. At the moment, about half the people I've spoke to are in favour and the other have are opposed to dishes. Would it be fair to charge that kind of money on people who don't want Sky? Ignoring for a moment that not all of the people who want a dish, want Sky so a communal dish wouldn't be any use to them.

    I'm not trolling by the way, I'm on the board of directors for my estate so I'm trying to explain things from the other side of the fence. I'm still undecided on this one, I don't like them (asthetics, damage done to walls, window frames during installation, etc) but I understand why people want them. In particular, the way the buildings in my estate are designed, there's no back and front, their are entrances on both sides so no matter where the dish is, it's very visible.

    * I'm still reading those EU documents linked above so they may change things. The view of the rest of my board is that we can't stop people mounting dishes on their property but since neither the walls nor the balcony are their property so it's not an issue.


  • #34
    Bluefoam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,747 ✭✭✭Bluefoam


    I lived in an apartment block. We chose to live there partly because the quality of the design and build was superior to other apartments we could have bought & we wanted a high quality of life in an appealing environment, allot of it was to do with the massive balcony which was a very important part of our living environment and which we used allot. There were rules in place to limit satellite dishes and hanging of cloths on balconies - needless to say that many residents ignored the rules and put up dished and put cloths lines on their balconies - some of them were members of the committee. Most of the dishes were put on the roof area by people who owned the top apartments, believing that if they couldn't be seen by other residents they would get away with it.

    Anyway, one of the apartments on the ground floor started to flood from the walls during heavy rain & it was found that on installing one of the dishes that the waterproof membrane on the roof was damaged.

    The building belongs to all of the residents. So if you want to change the rules, you need to vote on it - if the other residents don't agree with you you should not do your own thing - I am glad I live in a house now, all apartment complexes end up looking like Beirut due to ignorant tenants...


  • #35
    ciaran76
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,697 ✭✭✭ciaran76


    Our estate has mixed aparments and houses. About 2 weeks ago the Management Company sent out letters saying people had 7 days to remove their dishes. If they did not they would do so themselves.

    Anyway 7 days past and they came around and removed the majority of them.

    We have access to NTL and Sky but to get Sky you have to go through a cable company who are charging an extra €18 a month for access to the communal dish on the roof.

    Anyway alot of people were not happy of this removal of their dish from the wall. I understand peoples complainst but when they moved in they could read this in their contracts they signed.

    €18 a month for access to a communal dish which every house/apartment was pre-wired to is alot so a good few people just went with NTL/UPC as it was cheaper.


  • #36
    Tony
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,336 ✭✭✭✭Tony


    ciaran76 wrote: »
    We have access to NTL and Sky but to get Sky you have to go through a cable company who are charging an extra €18 a month for access to the communal dish on the roof.

    I'm always suspicious when a company charges an ongoing revenue stream for hardware (with the exception of maintenance) when they are not programme providers. My thinking is every apartment should be wired for satellite with a basic Terrestrial service as standard, then the individual owners can choose what service they want from FTA, UPC or sky, even hotbird and astra 1 could be accommodated. In this scenario individual dishes become irrelevant.

    Desktop PC Boards discount code on https://www.satellite.ie/ is boards.ie



  • Advertisement
  • #37
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,493 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    ciaran76 wrote: »
    Anyway alot of people were not happy of this removal of their dish from the wall. I understand peoples complainst but when they moved in they could read this in their contracts they signed.

    As has been pointed out previously, just because there is something in the 'rules', contract, or lease, does not make it binding if it is contrary to legal statute.

    If your house rules or lease had a paragraph that stated that on the first day of every month every resident must launch fireworks from their balcony, would it be binding? Of course not, because it is ILLEGAL, no matter what you signed. The same applies here.


  • #38
    Bluefoam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,747 ✭✭✭Bluefoam


    spockety wrote: »
    As has been pointed out previously, just because there is something in the 'rules', contract, or lease, does not make it binding if it is contrary to legal statute.

    If your house rules or lease had a paragraph that stated that on the first day of every month every resident must launch fireworks from their balcony, would it be binding? Of course not, because it is ILLEGAL, no matter what you signed. The same applies here.

    If you sign an agreement to bide by the rules (not laws) of the complex you should do so. If you are opposed to the rules, you should petition your fellow residents and committee. If your opposition to the rules is reasonable you will have no problem changing them. If your fellow residents disagree with you, you should remember what you agreed to sign and stick to the wishes of the community.


  • #39
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,493 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    Bluefoam wrote: »
    If you sign an agreement to bide by the rules (not laws) of the complex you should do so. If you are opposed to the rules, you should petition your fellow residents and committee. If your opposition to the rules is reasonable you will have no problem changing them. If your fellow residents disagree with you, you should remember what you agreed to sign and stick to the wishes of the community.

    You are either completely missing the point, or you have actually not bothered to read any of the EU documents or directives on the matter.

    In trying to sound as unpatronising as possible, let me spell it out for you;
    Your Management Company or fellow residents, or community etc., have no RIGHT to impose an illegal rule such as this on you. If you don't believe me, please read the directives. To get you started, let me quote you a relevant paragraph:

    "Moreover, as the Court of Justice has repeatedly pointed out, it is not only the actions of
    public authorities which must not restrict this fundamental freedom, but the same principle
    also applies to other kinds of rules aiming to regulate service provision collectively. In fact,
    removing obstacles to the free movement of services, a fundamental objective of the
    European Union, would be compromised if the obstacles to be removed were only those set
    by the state and did not include those resulting from the exercise of their legal autonomy by
    associations or organisations which are not governed by public law.."

    It is ILLEGAL to restrict access to satellite reception by rule. What more do you need see or read before the message gets through?

    The onus should not be on an individual resident to 'petition' fellow residents in order to have an ILLEGAL rule removed! It should obviously just be ignored.

    BTW, in most cases, these no dish rules are not put in at the request of residents.. in
    new developments the rules are put in from the off by the developers while they hold onto
    control of the Management Company. In a lot of cases this is to protect cosy arrangements
    with monopoly cable operators on site. How can you possibly think this is in any way fair or right?
    In my particular case, the issue was brought up with the developers who are in control of the
    directorship of the management company, and they refused flat out to even discuss anything to
    do with satellite dishes, be it individual, or communal.


  • #40
    Bluefoam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,747 ✭✭✭Bluefoam


    spockety wrote: »
    You are either completely missing the point, or you have actually not bothered to read any of the EU documents or directives on the matter.

    In trying to sound as unpatronising as possible, let me spell it out for you;
    Your Management Company or fellow residents, or community etc., have no RIGHT to impose an illegal rule such as this on you. If you don't believe me, please read the directives. To get you started, let me quote you a relevant paragraph:

    "Moreover, as the Court of Justice has repeatedly pointed out, it is not only the actions of
    public authorities which must not restrict this fundamental freedom, but the same principle
    also applies to other kinds of rules aiming to regulate service provision collectively. In fact,
    removing obstacles to the free movement of services, a fundamental objective of the
    European Union, would be compromised if the obstacles to be removed were only those set
    by the state and did not include those resulting from the exercise of their legal autonomy by
    associations or organisations which are not governed by public law.."

    It is ILLEGAL to restrict access to satellite reception by rule. What more do you need see or read before the message gets through?

    The onus should not be on an individual resident to 'petition' fellow residents in order to have an ILLEGAL rule removed! It should obviously just be ignored.

    BTW, in most cases, these no dish rules are not put in at the request of residents.. in
    new developments the rules are put in from the off by the developers while they hold onto
    control of the Management Company. In a lot of cases this is to protect cosy arrangements
    with monopoly cable operators on site. How can you possibly think this is in any way fair or right?
    In my particular case, the issue was brought up with the developers who are in control of the
    directorship of the management company, and they refused flat out to even discuss anything to
    do with satellite dishes, be it individual, or communal.

    You don't seem to understand that depending on your legal position in relation to the ownership of the building, you may not have the right to effect the fabric of the building - this does not effect your right to have a dish, however it does severely limit the way in which you may choose to mount it. You should be a bit more mature in you responses and formulate a full argument before singling out a bit of a passage you have read...


  • #41
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,493 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    Well as I have pointed out before, the external facades of a building are owned by the Management Company, of which apartment owners are equal shareholders. So technically, you do have a very real interest (in terms of ownership) of the outside wall/balcony of your apartment. You ARE the Management Company.

    There are more ways to mount a dish than by drilling holes in a wall anyway, but these 'rules' don't take that into account.

    As for the maturity of my response, perhaps you should respect my argument by bothering to read it and understand it correctly. You have gone from a position of saying "you should respect these rules, simple as that", to saying "well whatever about your right to have a dish, you can't drill holes in the wall because you don't own it".


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    How Strange
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,339 ✭✭✭How Strange


    Used to work for a management company so there are two issues with regards to satellite dishes

    Firstly, it contravenes your EU rights to deny people access to tv channels in their own language so a management company cannot say you are not allowed to put up a dish. Most management companies have to thread very carefully when sending out notices as they know they could be taken to court by an owner/resident with enough spare time and cash to bring a case against them.

    Secondly, it is against your lease to attach anything to an external wall of the building. Owners might be members of the management company but the walls are common property and belong to the management company as a collective so one owner saying 'I'm a member so I own the wall so I can fix a dish to it' isn't correct. If all the owners/residents went around fixing dishes etc to the walls there would be chunks taken out of them which would lead to problems with water ingress and dampness. So bottom line you cannot fix a satellite dish to the external walls.

    A communal dish is the best way to resolve the issue of random dishes popping up all over the place and management co's are starting to see that. However, you'll always have one moany, contrary f*cker who says 'I don't want satellite tv, I'm happy with NTL so I'm not paying'.

    Also, satellite dishes on the external walls of a property make it look rundown and like a tenement. So again, its in the interests of a management co to look at a communal dish.

    However, you can put a dish on your balcony and under the EU rules there is nothing a management co can do to remove it. I used to try to infer this to foreign people when they rang me. I couldn't come out and say it but I tried to hint that anything on the balcony is private property and cannot be removed.


  • #43
    Tony
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,336 ✭✭✭✭Tony


    Bluefoam wrote: »
    You should be a bit more mature in you responses and formulate a full argument before singling out a bit of a passage you have read...

    I saw nothing immature in that post?

    Desktop PC Boards discount code on https://www.satellite.ie/ is boards.ie



  • #44
    faceman
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Entertainment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators Posts: 16,650 CMod ✭✭✭✭faceman


    this is becoming more and more a common topic these days. From a consumer perspective, i have been on both sides at some time or another, i.e. wanted a dish when i wasnt "allowed" and being pi$$ed off with another neighbour who did. (i will get to that later)

    heres my take anyway for what its worth. Even before debate on the topic kicked off, i always felt that these anti dish clauses were restricting consumer choice undeservedly and had to be in breach of some law somewhere. however as its never been challenged in court in ireland, that really dont matter. Management companies can still add it to the contracts.
    Perhaps this thread can spark it, but why not put a petition together and send it to a TD for action? look at the focus management companies got last year over their practices. Im sure this could get the similar focus if enough people lobbied.

    As for aesthetic reasons, that dont wash with me. I have yet to find a modern appartment complex in ireland that looks like a tenament as the result of dishes. There are far worse things that can do that, namely noisey neighbours, skangers hangin around etc etc.

    Finally the neighbour I was pi$$ed off with. Well i had a duplex that i owned and neighbour lived underneath in an appartment. his dish was erected and what i considered my balance wall and it was a shoddy job too. My issue was where it was placed and the poor job done on it.

    Arguments against damage etc as some posts have would be non existent if there were proper guidelines on how dishes should be erected.


  • #45
    Borzoi
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,876 ✭✭✭Borzoi


    spockety wrote: »
    Well as I have pointed out before, the external facades of a building are owned by the Management Company, of which apartment owners are equal shareholders. So technically, you do have a very real interest (in terms of ownership) of the outside wall/balcony of your apartment. You ARE the Management Company.

    Yes you have an interest in the ManCo - but legally it's a sperate entity. What you are suggesting is tantamount to saying as a Shareholeder in AIB that all the money in the bank is yours. By all means go to AGMs get involved with the ManCo, and try to get the rules changed, good luck.

    But this suggestion of rights is in my opinion farcical - I suspect (and IANAL) that the property rights of the ManCo as enshrined in our constitution would probably out weigh the EU law. Even if you could prove that the ManCo was denying you your right to Sky ;)


  • #46
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,493 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    Actually EU law overrides national law in many areas. I suggest european courts would take a dim view of having your right to satellite TV denied over the matter of how or where a dish is mounted. Of course, IANAL, and unless and until someone takes a case in Irish courts we are all just speculating.

    Given the number of people affected, I'm surprised it hasn't made it to court before now.


  • #47
    Hagar
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,793 ✭✭✭✭Hagar


    Borzoi wrote: »
    I suspect (and IANAL) that the property rights of the ManCo as enshrined in our constitution would probably out weigh the EU law.
    I believe the Constitution deals with the rights of the citizens of the State. A company is only a legal entity not a citizen and doesn't have rights as such. INALE.


  • #48
    Bluefoam
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,747 ✭✭✭Bluefoam


    I think the two issues are being mixed up here. We have established that you have a right to television, whatever the source. However, the fact that under planning and property law that you may not fix objects to the fabric of the building does not effect these rights. You can find alternative methods of receiving the signal.

    Therefore, you are not entitled to fix a satellite dish to the wall of your building if your lease/planning/owners rights do not entitle you to do so...

    The EU law does not entitle everyone to Satellite TV, it does however entitle the consumer to choice...


  • #49
    markpb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,342 ✭✭✭markpb


    spockety wrote: »
    I suggest european courts would take a dim view of having your right to satellite TV denied over the matter of how or where a dish is mounted.

    You keep harping back to the same EU law and human rights convention but you're ignoring the other part of the law that people have mentioned - you do not own the property you're trying to attach the dish to, you're a shareholder in a company which owns it but it's not yours.

    Ultimately this may be solved by a court case but what you keep forgetting is that if a management company has to defend itself against a court case, all the owners including the one bringing the case will have to pay for it. Sueing your MC is like shooting yourself in the foot. Like others have said, the best way to resolve this is to go to the AGM and discuss it with the other owners and with the directors (assuming of course the developer has handed over control of the estate).


  • #50
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,493 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    You're talking about an ideal world. As I've already said, my Management Co will be controlled by developers for at least another 2 or 3 years based on the amount of development left to do. I have heard of other developments where developers have retained a single apartment in a development in order that they don't have to hand over the directorship of the management co to residents at all!! I am personally dealing with a Management Co who have point blank refused to even acknowledge that the word "satellite" even exists except for to say "no satellite dishes"..
    As a result of this, my RIGHT to install a satellite dish is being infringed, it is as simple as that. The commission have dealt particularly with apartment blocks where management co's or co-operatives are responsible for communal property etc.,

    "However, neither freedom of expression nor the principle of the free movement of
    services should be considered absolute prerogatives. The individual right to install a
    satellite dish, which is covered by freedom of expression, must be exercised in such a
    way as to respect certain information and consultation arrangements, as required in
    apartment blocks, for example, and should be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

    Naturally, the opportunity to install a satellite dish should not be hindered by
    excessively costly installation and operational arrangements which would result in the
    restriction of an individual's opportunity to receive all the programmes of his choice;
    even less should it be hindered by a general ban or groundless rejection, or opposed for
    aesthetic or technological reasons, for example."

    To my mind, that says that the individual has a right to install a satellite dish, but that in the case of an apartment block etc, that right must be exercised in consultation with the management company. If the management company turn around and say point blank "no individual dishes, no communal dish, full stop", then it is my belief that they are breaking the law. It is up to the Management Company to come up with the conditions which allow apartment owners to install a satellite dish, whether individually, or as a community, but blanket bans are out of order.


  • #51
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,493 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    Bluefoam wrote: »
    I think the two issues are being mixed up here. We have established that you have a right to television, whatever the source. However, the fact that under planning and property law that you may not fix objects to the fabric of the building does not effect these rights. You can find alternative methods of receiving the signal.

    Therefore, you are not entitled to fix a satellite dish to the wall of your building if your lease/planning/owners rights do not entitle you to do so...

    The EU law does not entitle everyone to Satellite TV, it does however entitle the consumer to choice...


    *sigh* You obviously have not done any reading of any of the links to EC documents already posted in this thread.

    They have said NOTHING about being entitled to television.. they are SPECIFICALLY dealing with the right to install a satellite dish, and in fact they specifically point out that cable tv is not a substitute:

    "It would therefore be unacceptable to force private individuals to
    receive TV programmes via the cable network rather than via a satellite dish."

    Ok look, I'll post up another quote for you.

    "The Commission would first point out that any private individual wishing to install a
    satellite dish should, as a rule, have the right to do so, and that the notion 'right to
    satellite reception' for individuals was explicitly set out in the Commission
    communication on satellite dishes of 27 June 2001 (COM(2001)351 final)."


  • Advertisement
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement