Need a Miracle. Moving to building-forced to have basic boomtown.

[kjbrill]

LauraMG ...

Don't give up so easily. Do you have Direct TV? If so is it not connected to your TV via a standard coaxial cable? If so, that cable has to be routed somewhere in the building. And you say you finally have internet access via CB DSL standard phone, slow as Hell.

You really need to talk to the other residents and determine how many are willing to pressure the management to provide a modern communications interface.

[Coseau]

Originally Posted by LauraMG

Im only a renter. The "management" says they are working on it. The head of facilities, an architect who lives here was complaining about the service - to me! He says there are going to be "meetings" to get it changed, but the fioptics isn't available on this street yet. No idea about direct tv - but it doesn't seem to be an option. Apparently we are only allowed their tv access and Cincinnati Bell for internet. Period.

I'm on it now. Moved in yesterday. Has to upload a file this afternoon - 345 MB - it took 1 hr and 34 minutes - but it worked. Woo hoo.

As renters, we clearly have no power here. There was a sign posted in the elevator yesterday - I tried not to take it as a welcoming gesture. It annouced an owners meeting about an amendment to limit the number of "renters" (can you hear the scorn?) in the building. I do understand as the banks don't want to give loans to buyers in building that are more than a certain % rented. It's an interesting transition after owning a great home for 30 years in an affluent suburb. Life at the bottom of the totem pole.

By law they can't deny you installing an over the air antenna or dbs satellite dish unless it is an historical building or for safety concerns. Also you do not need their prior approval to have one installed. It is explained in this link Over-the-Air Reception Devices Rule | FCC.gov. The satellite companies had this law passed by Congress so that renters could have access to their services.Some landlords try to keep their renters in the dark about this law or they just are not knowledgeable about it. So when you move in or if you are already in your new apartment if you call XYZ Satellite company and get a satellite installed for TV and internet purposes and your landlord tells you to take it down tell them to go pound sand because you have the law on your side.

[Sarah Perry]

Originally Posted by LauraMG

Im only a renter. The "management" says they are working on it. The head of facilities, an architect who lives here was complaining about the service - to me! He says there are going to be "meetings" to get it changed, but the fioptics isn't available on this street yet. No idea about direct tv - but it doesn't seem to be an option. Apparently we are only allowed their tv access and Cincinnati Bell for internet. Period.

I'm on it now. Moved in yesterday. Has to upload a file this afternoon - 345 MB - it took 1 hr and 34 minutes - but it worked. Woo hoo.

As renters, we clearly have no power here. There was a sign posted in the elevator yesterday - I tried not to take it as a welcoming gesture. It annouced an owners meeting about an amendment to limit the number of "renters" (can you hear the scorn?) in the building. I do understand as the banks don't want to give loans to buyers in building that are more than a certain % rented. It's an interesting transition after owning a great home for 30 years in an affluent suburb. Life at the bottom of the totem pole.

Sorry, dear, but assuming you were not trying to be ironic, the bottom of the totem pole is the people who sleep in the doorways of the courthouse. Google First World Cat Problems and you'll see the mental image I get when I read your postings. Seriously, nothing wrong with needing speedy net access for your work, but since it IS your livelihood, how could you have not checked before you signed the lease? Rent a small office and consider this an expensive learning experience.

[LauraMG]

Hi Sarah - Yep - First world problems. The solution - Renting an office, happened today. I wasn't trying to sound like a whiner. I wanted to ask if anyone here knew of a techie solution. The post above you sounds interesting - and I will look into that. Thanks Coseau.

[rrtechno]

Originally Posted by Coseau

By law they can't deny you installing an over the air antenna or dbs satellite dish unless it is an historical building or for safety concerns. Also you do not need their prior approval to have one installed. It is explained in this link Over-the-Air Reception Devices Rule | FCC.gov. The satellite companies had this law passed by Congress so that renters could have access to their services.Some landlords try to keep their renters in the dark about this law or they just are not knowledgeable about it. So when you move in or if you are already in your new apartment if you call XYZ Satellite company and get a satellite installed for TV and internet purposes and your landlord tells you to take it down tell them to go pound sand because you have the law on your side.

Be sure to read the details of the law completely. There are certain guidelines that must be met in order to be able to install things covered. Not everyone qualifies just because they are a renter.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by rrtechno

Be sure to read the details of the law completely. There are certain guidelines that must be met in order to be able to install things covered. Not everyone qualifies just because they are a renter.

I have to belive there are some restrictions. Otherwise there could be satellite antennas stuck out at how many angles off a building? Then the leads from the antenna into the building, just what rights do they have? Run some ugly cables down the side of the building into the unit? I frankly think this circumvents the rights of the property owner.

[rrtechno]

From the previously linked site:

"On October 25, 2000, the Commission further amended the rule so that it applies to customer-end antennas that receive and transmit fixed wireless signals. This amendment became effective on May 25, 2001.

The rule applies to individuals who place antennas that meet size limitations on property that they own or rent and that is within their exclusive use or control, including condominium owners and cooperative owners, and tenants who have an area where they have exclusive use, such as a balcony or patio, in which to install the antenna. The rule applies to townhomes and manufactured homes, as well as to single family homes.

The rule allows local governments, community associations and landlords to enforce restrictions that do not impair the installation, maintenance or use of the types of antennas described above, as well as restrictions needed for safety or historic preservation. Under some circumstances where a central or common antenna is available, a community association or landlord may restrict the installation of individual antennas. The rule does not apply to common areas that are owned by a landlord, a community association, or jointly by condominium or cooperative owners where the antenna user does not have an exclusive use area. Such common areas may include the roof or exterior wall of a multiple dwelling unit. Therefore, restrictions on antennas installed in or on such common areas are enforceable. "

In this case, it appears, a common or central antenna is available so the owner of the property is within legal rights, according to this regulation, to prohibit the installation of individual systems.

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer or legal expert and am just stating my interpretation of the cited regulation.

[kjbrill]

rrtechno ...
I tend to believe your propositions. Renters do not have unlimited access to satellite providers to install dishes, and particularly the cables from the dish down into the dwelling unit. A large, multi-unit building could be totally defaced by these installations. I have to believe the property owners have to be provided protections from same. If not, then our juristic system of common law has just gone to **** in a handbasket.