Fighting apartment management company over right to own dish

EricM

Over last few days I bought a digiglobe and sky hd, overall spent over 800 euro on satellite equipment and tonight i get a threatening letter (a copy of the rules with a small threat about contacting my landlord if i dont remove it) it was left under my door, probably left there by some other resident who didnt have the balls to knock on my door.

Now the european law says I have a right to use a satellite dish, and that rules that prohibit dishes are unacceptable.
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/01/913&format=HTML&aged=0&language=EN&guiLanguage=en

Has anyone ever tried to defend their right to own a dish under this law in ireland?

The dish in question is a digiglobe which sits on my balcony, its not attached or bolted down, so i dont need planning permission.

What are my chances?

Mossy Monk

EricM wrote:

What are my chances?

Favourable if European Law is on your side.

Prenderb

It sits on your balcony, and people still complain about it? What is this country coming to....

thos

Do you own the apartment, or are you renting ?

It looks like the letter came from a resident as opposed to management company ?

mikemac

To be fair, seeing large dishes all over apartment blocks does look terrible but if it's on your balcony, I see no problem.

Regarding the rules, did you sign something when moved in like an agreement not to put a dish outside?

mjsmyth

Morning,

Like micmclo, I too think that large dishes on apartment blocks look terrible just purely for aesthethic reasons. However, I don't think that the small Sky dish, if installed correctly looks that bad at all. I think the problem arises when one flat has an 80cm white dish, the next has a 60cm grey dish and then the other has a standard Sky dish.. It just looks messy. If they were all uniform in size and colour, I think they would look fine.. Thats not going to happen though.

When you signed your lease, did it spcifically say that you could not attach a satellite dish? How exactly is it worded? My thinking is that if it specifically says Dish, well then the Globe is not a dish, its a, well its a Globe! It just happens to contain a dish in its internals. Mind you, you are screwed if it says satellite receiving equipment.

The other point to take note of is do you really want to p*ss your landlord off? When you rented the apartment, did you talk about satellite tv? If so, what was his attitude?

Last, but not least, type up a letter. Copy it and place a copy in each persons mailbox detailing the rules and how (only if it mentions attaching a dish), you are not breaking them because:

a) It is not a dish, but a Globe which can receive satellite recpetion and also a beautiful, but large, balcony light.

b) Mention that it is free standing and not attached to any part of the building.

I would also include photographs from street level to show it cannot be seen and so on and so forth. I would include a print out and a link to that EU Press release. I don't know how sound it is or the legal footings, but it looks good.

Finally I would ask that the person who issued the original letter please reply to the points in person as you would like to talk them through on a one to one basis.

Thats what I would do.....

mj

MaxFlower

How did they know this was a satellite dish. Have you been telling people about this. It looks like a light!
TBH I didn't know you could get something like this. Its brilliant. If only I knew about these 2 years ago when I agonised about putting a dish on my house. In the end I put it up but I'm still not a fan.

wil

Certain national practices such as technical, administrative, architectural or fiscal obstacles are incompatible with the principle of the free movement of goods and services to which end-users of satellite dishes are entitled.
[ COM(2001) 351 ]

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/ecomm/doc/info_centre/communic_reports/satellite_dish/antenna_en.pdf

I suggest you fight fire with water.*
Print out a copy of the 27 page document above and if possible accompany it with a solicitors letter threatening legal action to the highest level (ie the EU courts) if there is any attempt to deny you your rights under Freedom of Goods and Services.
Post this under the door of whoever you suspect delivered your warning note.
If it did come to it from what is written here there is little doublt with a decent solicitor and reasonably prepared case you would win.
You are covered in almost every way as you did go out of your way to purchase a much more expensive dish in order to avoid any clash with any planning permission regulations and your dish is freestanding, not causing damage to any structure. Under this Commission opinion you are not even expected to go this far in order to receive satellite transmissions. Even signed management company rules and planning permission regulations would appear to be in direct contravention of your rights except in exceptional circumstances
If you did eventually go to court it would for once and for all draw a line under this regular question.
(* recommendation and personal interpretation by person with no connection to the legal profession)

copacetic

keithers911 wrote:

How did they know this was a satellite dish. Have you been telling people about this. It looks like a light!
TBH I didn't know you could get something like this. Its brilliant. If only I knew about these 2 years ago when I agonised about putting a dish on my house. In the end I put it up but I'm still not a fan.

have to disagree with this, they look a lot better than normal dishes but are massive, there is no way anyone would put a 'light' that size on a balcony. It is obvious they are sat rxers imo.

I've been looking at the digicube as a nicer solution but it is really big too and where I would put it to be out of sight would mean my reception would be rotten if people stand on the balcony! I'm in two minds, plenty of people in my development have put up sat dishes even though it is specifically not allowed in the lease agreements and they look like crap. I'm not sure I want to be one of these people (whatever about the semantics of whether it is a 'dish' or no).

I'll keep looking for a better, really discreet solution.

wil

If you mean by discrete - smaller then perhaps if you are in an area of good signal strength a microdish or a flat panel such as discussed previously
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055119749

On the other hand as having already taken reasonable action and spent considerable money why should he be denied his riights. Maybe some hanging baskets and plant pots might help if the aesthetics are still a problem for you.
To make a point perhaps he could get one of these :eek:
http://www.redferret.net/wp-content/uploads/2007/05/gatr.jpg

Ulsterman 1690

it was left under my door, probably left there by some other resident who didnt have the balls to knock on my door.

anonymous letters are usually best ignored

is_that_so

I am of the opinion that people should not do as they wish in apartment blocks and in our own block we have set rules as to where people can put dishes, which work perfectly well.

The difficulty here is that in signing a contract you agree to be bound by certain rules. Those rules may not preclude the use of dishes but may forbid what you want to do, in the same way that some blocks will not allow people to hang their washing out.

If your own landlord has no objection to the rules then you may find it difficult to go against it. It is your landlord's property and not yours. Tenant rights in Ireland are not as developed as in others parts of Europe. There are also council restrictions in some parts of the country which forbid putting dishes on the front of buildings.

uberwolf

your problem is like this. The management company own the balcony and the exterior walls, and all common areas. So they are perfectly entitled to dictate how these are utilised.

It would be like attaching your dish to your neighbours house. You just can't do it, because it's not your property.

Owen

I can't see the difference between using a Globe on the balcony, and putting a potted plant out there.

uberwolf

ned78 wrote:

I can't see the difference between using a Globe on the balcony, and putting a potted plant out there.

that's all well and good, but it's the management companies prerogative.

From their perspective it's much easier to police a straight up no dish policy, than it is a no dish over a certain size policy.

For the OP is there any way to bring the dish in doors?

Ulsterman 1690

The dish is unlikely to work indoors. Satellite signals wont travel through walls (even windows will attenuate the signals by some degree depending on the purity and thickness of the glass)

Incidentally the OP may well have signed a contract with his landlord but unless there was a clause in the lease against satellite antennas it is going to be pretty difficult for the management company to take action against a tenant (and thats leaving aside the whole question of European law)

ro2

Can't understand why more management companies don't provide access to a communal dish, especially if they don't want people having them on their balconies. This lark of builders letting only one provider into an apartment block and getting a payoff should be banned.

altered121

alot depends on local council laws as well as management companies
eg Galway city has very tight regs on dishes.
also planning permission laws eg dishes forward on building etc.
most management companies contract one firm to provide FTA or ntl or chorus or another variation.

copacetic

ro2 wrote:

Can't understand why more management companies don't provide access to a communal dish, especially if they don't want people having them on their balconies. This lark of builders letting only one provider into an apartment block and getting a payoff should be banned.

well i have this and it is what I am trying to get away from, I'm paying a fee to the provider to allow me access the dish. It also was only wired one feed to each apt so I can't get sky plus.

It is a pretty crappy solution to be honest. Although I wouldn't expect a builder to allow loads of different companies prewire the apts either.

Hence I would like my own dish, but it clearly isn't allowed and I knew this when I bought the apt. Just because other people ignore the rules and make the place look crappy I'm not in any rush to. I have been looking at some of the other 'flat' dishes and the 'digicube' which looks like a better solution than the globe from the same people.

EricM

i rent the apartment, i am in dublin, dish wont work inside through the window, will work if i leave the balcony door open but im not gonna sit inside in the winter with my door open.

i have a hdtv and i want sky because of sky hd and sky plus, which ntl doesnt offer either.

i had specifically asked about dish before agreeing to rent, i was told (by the rental agent remax) the landlord had no problem with me putting up a dish.

It was only after i signed the rental agreement that the management company rules said i could not put up a dish.

A guy around the corner has a dish up, i dont know if they threatened him too, or maybe he owns the apt and they cant do anything, but its been up there for a while.

My digiglobe is in the corner of the balcony, behind two large plants, its difficult to even see it.

Ulsterman 1690

i had specifically asked about dish before agreeing to rent, i was told (by the rental agent remax) the landlord had no problem with me putting up a dish.

It was only after i signed the rental agreement that the management company rules said i could not put up a dish.

in that case sounds like they can do damn all and in fact both you and the managment company might even have a case against the agent.

But like I say anonymous letters should be ignored

mikemac

Tbh, if your neighbours was a real man (or women), they'd come and have a chat with you about this issue. If they can't put their name on the letter then they're not prepared to stand over it.

Unless, they think you're a rough thug who'd sooner beat them than discuss the problem:p

If you had some enormous dish that could be seen streets away and that looked terrible I'd have no sympathy for you but it seems you're being reasonable so stand up for yourself here.

Besprechen

EricM wrote:

It was only after i signed the rental agreement that the management company rules said i could not put up a dish.

A guy around the corner has a dish up, i dont know if they threatened him too, or maybe he owns the apt and they cant do anything, but its been up there for a while.

if the guy round the corner from you is in the same block of flats and owns his apartment, wouldnt he still be subject to the rules of the management company, might be worth having a word with him?

Ulsterman 1690

TBH I reckon a lot of this anti dish nonsense is a hangover from the days when satellite TV was a rich mans toy and therfore despised out of ignorance and envy.

Theres a bit of it with mobile phones as well

wil

and a very big dash of busybodiness. :mad:
If dish can barely be seen from below they must have gone out of their way to identify it. I wouldnt know what a digiglobe was in plain view, so how did they behind plants. Perhaps their motive is more sinister than apartment rules:(

cast_iron

uberwolf wrote:

your problem is like this. The management company own the balcony and the exterior walls, and all common areas. So they are perfectly entitled to dictate how these are utilised.

It would be like attaching your dish to your neighbours house. You just can't do it, because it's not your property.

So, if I put a table and chair out on my balcony, it's like putting them in my neighbours house? I don't think so.

How can the management company own apartment's balconies? That sounds farcical to me.

smcelhinney

uberwolf wrote:

your problem is like this. The management company own the balcony and the exterior walls, and all common areas. So they are perfectly entitled to dictate how these are utilised.

It would be like attaching your dish to your neighbours house. You just can't do it, because it's not your property.

Most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Do you rent or own? I've been renting for 12 years and never heard this before in my life. In fact, balcony space is often (more times than not) factored into square footage when valueing (sp) a property.

OP, you need to get the line of communication between you and the management company completely clear. If your neighbour, who has the dish erected already, does in fact own his house, and you have the permission of the landlord, then it is effectively as if the landlord is erecting the dish himself.

Ergo, landlords house, landlords dish (owned by you). Its amazing the things that management companies put in their contracts these days. Im actually considering talking to one about the condition they put in about preventing me from drying clothes on my balcony. Thats a civil liberty, and Im an energy conscious person. Who do they think they are?

Anyhow, best of luck, let me know how it goes.

axer

smcelhinney wrote:

Most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Do you rent or own? I've been renting for 12 years and never heard this before in my life. In fact, balcony space is often (more times than not) factored into square footage when valueing (sp) a property.

It was discussed in http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055072609
Aparently it can be seen as being part of the external structure of the apartment block.

It is wise advice to ignore anonymous letters.

jd

smcelhinney wrote:

Most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Do you rent or own? I've been renting for 12 years and never heard this before in my life. In fact, balcony space is often (more times than not) factored into square footage when valueing (sp) a property.

OP, you need to get the line of communication between you and the management company completely clear. If your neighbour, who has the dish erected already, does in fact own his house, and you have the permission of the landlord, then it is effectively as if the landlord is erecting the dish himself.

Ergo, landlords house, landlords dish (owned by you). Its amazing the things that management companies put in their contracts these days. Im actually considering talking to one about the condition they put in about preventing me from drying clothes on my balcony. Thats a civil liberty, and Im an energy conscious person. Who do they think they are?

Anyhow, best of luck, let me know how it goes.

I think we are talking about apartments here.
In general-
Apartment owners/dwellers do not own/rent the external fixtures (including the external walls), grounds and common arteas- these are owned by the management company. Also the leasehold terms generally state that the owner/occupier has a licence to use the balcony- not that they own it. So the management company is within its rights to ask for something to be removed from its property.

BTW all the owners are normally a member of the management company- the management company then appoints an agent to act on its behalf.

Also from that link re European Law
Concerns of an architectural and town-planning nature, which are often cited in this context, can be met by solutions which make it possible, where necessary and technically feasible, to minimise the visual and aesthetic impact of satellite dishes without impairing quality of reception, under reasonable conditions and at reasonable cost


And seeing as you mentioned it, washing lines on balconies makes the development look terrible.

copacetic

smcelhinney wrote:

Most ridiculous thing I've ever heard. Do you rent or own? I've been renting for 12 years and never heard this before in my life. In fact, balcony space is often (more times than not) factored into square footage when valueing (sp) a property.

maybe it is the most ridiculous thing you have ever heard, but apparently shows how little you know.

Sir Oxman

EricM wrote:

i rent the apartment, i am in dublin, dish wont work inside through the window, will work if i leave the balcony door open but im not gonna sit inside in the winter with my door open.

i have a hdtv and i want sky because of sky hd and sky plus, which ntl doesnt offer either.

i had specifically asked about dish before agreeing to rent, i was told (by the rental agent remax) the landlord had no problem with me putting up a dish.

It was only after i signed the rental agreement that the management company rules said i could not put up a dish.

A guy around the corner has a dish up, i dont know if they threatened him too, or maybe he owns the apt and they cant do anything, but its been up there for a while.

My digiglobe is in the corner of the balcony, behind two large plants, its difficult to even see it.

I put a dish up on my rented apt almost 2.5 yrs ago with agents and landlords express permission.

then a year later got a letter from Planning dept saying I had to take it down.

I discussed it with them, explained everything and in the end had no chice but to remove it.

I then thought, feck them and spent a day or two positioning the dish freestanding on my balcony.
From the main road, you would have to have the sight of Superman to see it plus it's not affixed to the outside of the aprtment.

Haven't heard a word from mgmt company (who only put up their ridiculous no sat dishes notice 6 months after I moved in) and even if I did I'd tell em to buzz off.

Since taking down my dish and complying with Planning Laws, about twenty other apts have put up affixed dishes and they are all still there (some over a year up)

I have no problem with them but understand some people may be offended by the sight of them.

Simple thing - mgmt companies/builders should have no right whatsoever to limit owners/tenants as to what TV service they can use - in nearly all cases it is a money grabbing exercise ensuring a captive market for the poor sods who have to live in these blocks.
Sky are very willing to install communal dishes which would solve everyones problems with this stupid, stupid situation. It would at the very least give tenants/owners a choice.

To the OP: How is the reception on your digiglobe and as it's freestanding do you have any problems with it 'falling over'?;)

EricM

It hasnt fallen over, signal is good, i dont get all channels but i get all the ones i watch anyway.

My balcony has grooves in the floor boards, so its kind of wedged in where it cant fall over.
It does wobble in the wind though, but hasnt intterupted my viewing.

Some channels are more sensitive then others (i used 147 for testing since its seems the most sensitive), i have to have it positioned perfectly, others will work with no disruption even if the dish moves a bit.

gazzer

I moved into my house (not apartment) 5 years ago and had to sign up for a management company. At the time NTL was not out in my area and there was no sign of them coming in the months ahead so I decided to get a satellite dish. About 2 months later the rules of the management company came in my door.. I had been in my house 3 months at this stage and this was the first time I had seen these rules.

One of the rules was that I could not have a satellite dish outside my house. My dish is just above my bedroom window. I ignored the letter and havnt heard anything from them since. Now having said that the company are in charge of maintaining my estate do a terrible job and I personally feel that somebody who buys a house should not have to pay 1000 a year just to have the grass near their house cut but thats for another thread.

Besprechen

smcelhinney wrote:

Its amazing the things that management companies put in their contracts these days. Im actually considering talking to one about the condition they put in about preventing me from drying clothes on my balcony. Thats a civil liberty, and Im an energy conscious person. Who do they think they are?

my new place is the same.. Its built into a covenant that there is no clothes drying on my balcony but to be fair the balconies are tiny where i am and I dont think it'd look very good. Cant wait now to see the reaction when I put a window tint on the inside of the windows to shield the eyes of my nosey neighbours!:cool:

uberwolf

smcelhinney wrote:

Most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

:rolleyes:

I own, so I have understandably had to concern myself with the legalities of it somewhat more than yourself. But your ignorance of the matter shouldn't be your only argument.

You may take my word for it, or those of the others who have backed up what I have had to say.

As the management company (of which all owners are shareholders) own the complex, the company exclusively licences the use of the balcony to the owner of that apartment to use within the terms of that licence - tables yes, sattelites no, etc depending on the whim of the solicitor who originally drew up the licence agreement, guided by the planning permission granted and guidelines in place by the planning authority.

If you don't accept that go post on accom / prop. It is the case, and that is the position the OP is in.

kmick

Option A
Stock up on essential goods like water, carbohydrates (rice, pasta, freeze dried potatoes) and vitamins. Buy some automatic weapons and earplugs and heavy duty goggles (for the flashbangs). Reinforce your doors and windows with heavy metal plates welded to the internal metal builiding supports. Then sit it out.

Option B
Ignore it. The wheels of justice move very slowly.

wil

"Whim" is exactly the problem the EU has addressed.
The management company, solicitor, county council or government has no right to restrict the use of satellite dishes by individuals unless within the rules they make they also enshrine this right. Any exception has to be exactly that, an exception and exception for good reason not and absolutely not Whimsy.
From what is written down, any mediocre solicitor could drive a coach and four through almost all these whimsical rules, You may not automatically have right to a table or clothes drying but you do to a satellite dish.

The commissions publication I listed earlier basically says that the right to receive satellite broadcasts of your choosing are protected under the Freedom of Goods and Services.

"Given that Community law takes precedence over national law, Articles 28 and 49 lay down rights for the interested parties that the national authorities are required to respect and protect.
Moreover, they not only render automatically inapplicable any conflicting provision of current national law, but also preclude the valid adoption of new national legislative measures to the extent to which they would be incompatible with community provisions 20."

"The bodies of every Member State are under an obligation to ensure the primacy of Community law. This holds not only for the national courts, but for all administrative bodies,"

"any national measure which limits the ability to receive transmissions and
services via satellite dishes is also required to be compatible with Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which specifically enshrines “the freedom to receive ... information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers”27.

In reference to aesthetics

"Thus an attempt must be made to reconcile aesthetic considerations with the fundamental right of any interested individual to have access to information and services by installing a satellite dish.
Such an assessment can only be done by looking at the individual circumstances in each case.
Nonetheless, such restrictions must be duly substantiated, and the aesthetic considerations must be real and not merely a pretext. In addition, given the principle of proportionality, these restrictions cannot be applied in general. Each individual case must be looked at, and, where specific restrictions are necessary, measures which impinge as little as possible on the fundamental freedom in question must be preferred."

and in reference to historic or listed building restrictions

"Moreover, for aesthetic reasons, it is not uncommon for particularly strict conditions to be set for any changes or additions to be made to listed buildings because of their monumental, architectural or historical value.
In sum, these circumstances are highly unusual and may justify special rules precisely because they are so different from ordinary situations which have no such restrictions and constraints."

In fact the OP situation is practically stated in the document as an example of an acceptable provision -
"giving preference to placing individual satellite dishes in areas that would not be visible from the street, or as unobtrusive as possible (for example on a private, interior balcony or in a spot behind the edge of the roof rather than on the facade of the building)"

That is as is published by the EU Commission and not hearsay of passersby or vested interests.

So basically if management companies etc want to make rules these rules have to enshrine the rights to satellite reception of choice in them and not simply ban them. Whimsy does not make rules.


Addendum
How many thrown up blocks of apartments could be considered to have an iota of monumental, historic or architectural value.
Only in Ireland could you be offended by a satellite dish but no problem falling over the mounds of rubbish for collection that businesses leave straddled our footpaths every week, illegal dumps in ditches all over our coutryside, umpteen poles and posts in every direction on our streets making it nigh on impossible for blind or wheelchair use, then they erect an even bigger pole on our capitals main thoroughfare Ronald MacDonald St and call it a monument.

Sir Oxman

wil wrote:

"Whim" is exactly the problem the EU has addressed.
The management company, solicitor, county council or government has no right to restrict the use of satellite dishes by individuals unless within the rules they make they also enshrine this right. Any exception has to be exactly that, an exception and exception for good reason not and absolutely not Whimsy.
From what is written down, any mediocre solicitor could drive a coach and four through almost all these whimsical rules, You may not automatically have right to a table or clothes drying but you do to a satellite dish.

The commissions publication I listed earlier basically says that the right to receive satellite broadcasts of your choosing are protected under the Freedom of Goods and Services.

"Given that Community law takes precedence over national law, Articles 28 and 49 lay down rights for the interested parties that the national authorities are required to respect and protect.
Moreover, they not only render automatically inapplicable any conflicting provision of current national law, but also preclude the valid adoption of new national legislative measures to the extent to which they would be incompatible with community provisions 20."

"The bodies of every Member State are under an obligation to ensure the primacy of Community law. This holds not only for the national courts, but for all administrative bodies,"

"any national measure which limits the ability to receive transmissions and
services via satellite dishes is also required to be compatible with Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, which specifically enshrines “the freedom to receive ... information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers”27.

In reference to aesthetics

Thus an attempt must be made to reconcile aesthetic considerations with the fundamental right of any interested individual to have access to information and services by installing a satellite dish.
Such an assessment can only be done by looking at the individual circumstances in each case.
Nonetheless, such restrictions must be duly substantiated, and the aesthetic considerations must be real and not merely a pretext. In addition, given the principle of proportionality, these restrictions cannot be applied in general. Each individual case must be looked at, and, where specific restrictions are necessary, measures which impinge as little as possible on the fundamental freedom in question must be preferred."

and in reference to historic or listed building restrictions

"Moreover, for aesthetic reasons, it is not uncommon for particularly strict conditions to be set for any changes or additions to be made to listed buildings because of their monumental, architectural or historical value.
In sum, these circumstances are highly unusual and may justify special rules precisely because they are so different from ordinary situations which have no such restrictions and constraints."

In fact the OP situation is practically stated in the document as an example of an acceptable provision -
"giving preference to placing individual satellite dishes in areas that would not be visible from the street, or as unobtrusive as possible (for example on a private, interior balcony or in a spot behind the edge of the roof rather than on the facade of the building)"

How many thrown up blocks of apartments could be considered to have an iota of monumental, historic or architectural value.
Only in Ireland could you be offended by a satellite dish but no problem falling over the mounds of rubbish for collection that businesses leave straddled our footpaths every week, illegal dumps in ditches all over our coutryside, umpteen poles and posts in every direction on our streets making it nigh on impossible for blind or wheelchair use, then they erect an even bigger pole on our capitals main thoroughfare Ronald MacDonald St and call it a monument.

So basically if management companies etc want to make rules these rules they have to enshrine the rights to satellite reception of choice in them and not simply ban them. Whimsy does not make rules.

Well said.
Sole provision of TV provider in (thrown-up) apt blocks and estates are a money-making scam riding the arse of tenants and owners - and that is the end of it.
The reason they can do it is the rollover mindset of Irish people (inc myself though I have pointed out I have stuck one and a half fingers up at my so-called 'management' company - landlord in agreement with me)

It's written down so it must be law.:rolleyes::mad:

Sir Oxman

EricM wrote:

It hasnt fallen over, signal is good, i dont get all channels but i get all the ones i watch anyway.

My balcony has grooves in the floor boards, so its kind of wedged in where it cant fall over.
It does wobble in the wind though, but hasnt intterupted my viewing.

Some channels are more sensitive then others (i used 147 for testing since its seems the most sensitive), i have to have it positioned perfectly, others will work with no disruption even if the dish moves a bit.

Thanks.

I think I'll stick with my makeshift solution.;)

uberwolf

wil wrote:

"Whim" is exactly the problem the EU has addressed.
The management company, solicitor, county council or government has no right to restrict the use of satellite dishes by individuals unless within the rules they make they also enshrine this right.

you chose one word in what I had to say. Unfortunately you have failed to recognise that a whim is a perfectly legitimate rationale when you're deciding what do with private property. The balcony is another entities private property, i.e. the management company's.

What you're proposing is the legislation you're citing allows you to attach a satellite to your neighbours gaff, simply because you can't get coverage from your own. Obviously this is not the case. You have no rights over the balcony, no claim except through a stake in the management company.

Your only legal solution, afaics, is to petition the management company to relax the rules governing the use of the balcony, and then defend that position when a local authority attempts to break the legislation you have cited.

Do you honestly not understand that? No one is saying what you can or can't do with your own property.

EricM

is it legal for the management company to say they own the balcony?, this seems like a loophole to deny me of my rights.

It would seem like common sence that the balcony belongs to the owner of the apartment.

uberwolf

you buy what you buy!

All common areas are owned by the management company. This extends to balconies.

wil

sententia absentis funditus. Please read and re-read what the EU Comission is saying. They spent 17 pages telling us in fairly clear English and whatever other EU language is preferred. They havent drafted specific legislation because in their opinion the current legislation is clear enough. They may have to if abuse continues. This is a right. If someone wants to make rules which may infringe on this right then they must enshrine within those rules the right. It's pretty clear. I honestly understand that.

I am not aware of any EU law on the rights of management companies, even if there were, it is also pretty clear, it is not allowed to make a rule that contravenes this right of freedom of goods and services.
Irrespective of whether anyone thinks this is correct or not.

So as the balcony is as you say not owned by the person who bought the apartment, why dont they stick no tresspassing signs on it and arrest homeowners as they sniff the morning air? Because that is nonsensical.
Landlord rents apartment, they still own the apartment but they dont retain the right to simply walk in, the apartment is now the home of another whose right to enjoy his home and right to privacy preclude the other rights of the owner. And so it remains until the person vacates the apartment.
Management companies are meant to serve the collective good not act as dictators. In theory they are there to protect the interest of the owners and not to act as a law unto themselves, to provide services and maintenance for the common good. What they do in practice doesnt always correspond. And while the developers keep their hand in they want their money.
As a relatively recent "entity" in Ireland they are still unregulated (some due late 2007 or whenever (National Property Services Regulatory Authority and National Property Services Regulatory Authority Bill), other than under the Companies Act. The NCA commissioned a report on the PM industry, its findings making 25 recommendations including regulation, protective measures, the establishment of a professional body and qualifications for those working in the industry.
Ann Fitzgerald , Executive Chair of the NCA and Director of Consumer Affairs said, "We commissioned the report because consumers, primarily young people, are very vulnerable when they buy apartments or homes in multi-unit developments. Our research showed that they are unsure of their rights and don't know how the management company and management agent system works. Apartment living is now an integral part of Irish life and it is imperative that consumers are properly protected`
They produced a useful explanatory doc on PM Companies
http://www.consumerconnect.ie/eng/Hot_Topics/Campaigns/Management%20Companies%20Booklet.pdf

The contract you sign is meant to be a fair contract, not a denial of rights. Of course people need rules, some more than others and they are for the common good of all living in the confines of apartment blocks. You dont have a right to litter or play loud music or graffiti your walls but you do have a right to satellite services.
A balcony serves no purpose on its own, it cannot be rented or sold on its own. Without an apartment to service it, it is a pigeon loft.
Therefore a balcony comes as part of the rented or purchased unit. It is not an external fitting that can be moved around, blocked off, whatever. It is within your exclusive use or control. What is the point otherwise. Was it built there to give a management company something to lord over. This is all nonsense. A right is a right is a right.
Common area, Huh? perhaps when antigravity boots replace heelys.
(Visions of uberworld - management company representatives organise a barbie on Erics balconey and dont invite Eric)
If you try to remove or block that right then you are in the wrong.
It is absolute nonsense to try illustrating your argument with some farcical situation of putting your dish on another persons wall, that is their home, it is not for your use. A balconey on your apartment is for your use, whether you own it or not. This regularly cited nonsense argument serves purely to misdirect and has no merit. For a start you would likely have to commit tresspass to do so.

If a management company wishes to restrict the use of the balconey etc and not allow discrete dishes on them then they first of all have to have a pretty good reason for this, not a made up one, then second they have to provide a means to allow proper access to satellite services.
That is the very clear point missed, it doesnt matter really what rules they make so long as your rights are accomadated and addressed within those rules.

Different jurisdiction but they had pretty much the same rights and policies in the US though the same problems with management companies, in 1996 and again after appeal (moan whine Fifth Ammendment, constitution etc ) against it by IREM (Institute of Real Estate Management - umbrella organisation) in July 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that Order 98-273, issued by the FCC, would remain in effect, ie confirmed that "In general, a satellite dish that is 1 meter (39.37 inches) or less may be installed on an area that you own or where you have exclusive use" Stems from the same basic rights as we have in the EU.
"The FCC confirmed that a unit owner has the right to install a dish in areas such as balcony that has been designed to be used only by that unit owner/tenant even if association management or maintenance personnel has access to that areas.
"Tenants on rental properties may install satellite dishes on balconies, porches and other properties with leaseholds."
http://www.fcc.gov/mb/facts/otard.html
http://www.irem.org/pdfs/publicpolicy/Telecom.pdf (the inustries own publication)
IREM very unhappy, but common sense prevailed'

US aside I fail to see what is not clear here. This is a right not a privilege, a right. Do we need word specific legislation to spell out every single eventuality where others try to abuse our rights.
If a management company held you locked captive in your apartment until you paid your overdue fees because they wrote it in the rules, despite the fact that some people may think is fine, they have no right to deny you your right to freedom. I could keep using ridiculous analogies here, wasting my time but unless the EU draft some superior EU law under which these rights may be denied then it still remains, your right, my right.

Now on a "perfectly legitimate rationale" I think I'll paint my house pink with purple polkadots, convert it in to a giant wormery and invite NASA to launch their next spaceshuttle from the lawn.
Damn, common sense prevents me.
Sadly it is well and truly lacking in the person (and many like them) that posted the letter under the OPs door. When common sense cannot prevail there really is nothing more to say. Do.

spockety

*clap clap*

proper order, great write up.

Sam Radford

Wil, I love your posts. They are lucid and to the point. I agree entirely.

Sponge Bob

a one liner would be to write to the management company and tell them they are in breach of the EU directive for not providing a communal dish, over to them!

go to www.eccdublin.ie for advice

spockety

Actually there is no 'communal dish' directive, just the directive that asserts the right to receive satellite TV.

I think the best approach is to write to your Management Co/Agency, and say something like :

"Dear XXX,

Further to your letter demanding removal of my satellite dish at Apartment ZZZ, I would like to advise that forcing me into a situation where I cannot receive a satellite signal would be a breach of my rights under European law regarding freedom of movement of goods and services throughout the EU.

You can read a directive from the European Commission at this web address, where they assert the EU citizens right to receive satellite signals, and the basis for this right under existing law.

http://blah.blah.blah/blahblahblah.html

I am happy to discuss the situation with you, where I am sure we can reach a compromise that everyone is happy with in terms of the location/design/appearance of my satellite dish. However, my right to receive satellite signals via a dish is not up for compromise or debate.

I look forward to hearing from you, and until such time as we reach an agreement on this matter, my existing dish will remain in place.

Best regards,

BLAH.
"

wil

Spockety- Excellent template.
If everyone concerned did this, then with a little sense I am sure some common ground could easily be reached. Most people would be willing to find a solution that suited everybody such as discrete/hidden/disguised dishes or common dishes.
SamR., Spock.. Appreciation appreciated but as they (should) say one good post doesnt make a forum. The doctor however said to keep taking the tablets.;)

Tony

Great post Wil

wil

I came across a further recent (2006) meeting memo from the EU
(Ive mentioned this elsewhere but for completeness I will add here)
It states pretty clearly that any association etc is not exempt from complying with the freedom of Goods and Services

"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 (see, inter alia, the judgments of 12 December 1974, Walrave, 36/74; 9 June 1977, van Ameyde, 90/76; 14 July 1976, Donà, C-13/76; 15 December 1995, Bosman, C-415/93, and 13 April 2000, Lehtonen, C-176/96)."
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2004_2009/documents/cm/617/617113/617113en.pdf

cmb.

spockety wrote: »

Actually there is no 'communal dish' directive, just the directive that asserts the right to receive satellite TV.

I think the best approach is to write to your Management Co/Agency, and say something like :

"Dear XXX,

Further to your letter demanding removal of my satellite dish at Apartment ZZZ, I would like to advise that forcing me into a situation where I cannot receive a satellite signal would be a breach of my rights under European law regarding freedom of movement of goods and services throughout the EU.

You can read a directive from the European Commission at this web address, where they assert the EU citizens right to receive satellite signals, and the basis for this right under existing law.

http://blah.blah.blah/blahblahblah.html

I am happy to discuss the situation with you, where I am sure we can reach a compromise that everyone is happy with in terms of the location/design/appearance of my satellite dish. However, my right to receive satellite signals via a dish is not up for compromise or debate.

I look forward to hearing from you, and until such time as we reach an agreement on this matter, my existing dish will remain in place.

Best regards,

BLAH.
"

this is a great template - the only question i have is what relevant legislation can i quote in sending this as this is becoming an issue with our management co. who are uninterested in genuine eyesores such as underwear drying on balcony railings etc but are satellite dish nazis