cable companies and developers

fta keith

up to july 2003 I used to have NTL and found their service very bad so through these type of forums I got digital satellite and an outdoor tv aerial all for a once off fee and only pay for the tv licence fee

Cable companies like NTL and developers do deals were the vast majority of apartment owners or letters are forced to pay for NTL instead of having choice, can anyone force the apartment complex to change this

I presume there people out there are forced to use NTL etc

spockety

I would LOVE to be forced to use NTL. At least they have digital etc!

Be grateful you're not forced into using some local cable operator with 20 analogue channels, no plans for digital never mind HD.

But yes, you can change it. You need to wait until the developer hands over control of the management company to the residents. Then you can basically vote to change or add providers to the development.

Ulsterman 1690

Surely these alleged "deals" between developers and cable companies are in breach of EU law both competition wise and from the point of view of Migrant workers wanting TV from their home countries

byte

Yeah, I believe that these deals and denial of personal TV services are in breach of some EU laws.

Who would somebody in this situation turn to, though?

altered121

fta keith wrote:

up to july 2003 I used to have NTL and found their service very bad so through these type of forums I got digital satellite and an outdoor tv aerial all for a once off fee and only pay for the tv licence fee

Cable companies like NTL and developers do deals were the vast majority of apartment owners or letters are forced to pay for NTL instead of having choice, can anyone force the apartment complex to change this

I presume there people out there are forced to use NTL etc

Since you have satellite since 2003 WHY do you care abouit descisions management companies make on flats? ( usually they opt for ntl cabling as they have no on-going costs)

Solair

Some complexes go as far as banning all external dishes and antennae in the management company contract.

I think it has to be legally dodgy. I'd say they'd have a very tough job making that stand up in court.

spockety

The problem is, nobody has actually taken a case to court yet regarding dish bans or developer enforced cable monopolies.

10's of thousands of people stuck in this position, and not one court case. Bizarre.

Sponge Bob

Solair wrote:

Some complexes go as far as banning all external dishes and antennae in the management company contract.

This is now the norm in apartments . I agree entirely where they have a communal dish on the roof with feeds to the flats . Of course they don't... do they

I think it has to be legally dodgy. I'd say they'd have a very tough job making that stand up in court.

It is legally dodgy to try to enforce anything around the back of a house and maybe the side but it has good foundation in planning law if a 1m white blob is stuck to the front of the house.

Its a change of facade that would require planning permission were the 1m white blob a sign for a knocking shop ....for example.

Aesthetically a lot of sat dishes looks crap but it does say a lot about the fabulous service we get from Chorus .

The best way of dealing with the cable companies is ask for an SLA ( you will not get one) and when they fail to deliver you can take the cable back and then put it out to tender or stick a few dishes and a multiswitch or two on as a local head end .

Let the cable co take the management company to court then. In my opinion they have not got a leg to stand on if they have refused to provide an SLA in writing and then the service within the parameters of the SLA ...thereby forcing the management company to do so for its members .

watty

People are famously good at complaining in Pub but not supporting any decent Consumer Rights groups. Ireland is pathetic for enforcement of Consumer rights.

paulm17781

Solair wrote:

Some complexes go as far as banning all external dishes and antennae in the management company contract.

I think it has to be legally dodgy. I'd say they'd have a very tough job making that stand up in court.

It's perfectly legal. Management companies are formed of owners, the owners form a committee who decide on these things. If dishes are banned in a complex, it is because the owners have agreed to this (at least a majority have) it can be straightforward to change (simple vote) but you have to have half the owners on your side.

It would stand up in court, the owners decided they do not want them, if you want to live there, you abide by the rules.

loyatemu

in some cases it may have been a condition of planning that individual dishes be banned. Apartment blocks with dishes on every balcony look terrible.

watty

They can only enforce it on the front of the building.
In any case a communal dish is actually no extra expense compared with separate ones.

Solair

paulm17781 wrote:

It's perfectly legal. Management companies are formed of owners, the owners form a committee who decide on these things. If dishes are banned in a complex, it is because the owners have agreed to this (at least a majority have) it can be straightforward to change (simple vote) but you have to have half the owners on your side.

It would stand up in court, the owners decided they do not want them, if you want to live there, you abide by the rules.

In an ideal management company setup - yes, however, in most cases the residents do not control the management company nor setup the rules.

paulm17781

Solair wrote:

In an ideal management company setup - yes, however, in most cases the residents do not control the management company nor setup the rules.

Really? That is probably illegal in itself. In situations like that residents should get together and work a way out of it.

Sponge Bob

for the first year or two, maybe three Solair. Yes. Then they control the rules by vote .

Mind you I mainly blame dempsey cullen and roches the last 3 environment ministers .....for being gob****es.