Pressuring management company to get alternative media provider in

tomselleck101

Currently in the apartment I live in, there is only one TV provider, cablewatch. <snip> It is against house rules to put up satellite dishes but every second apartment has one anyway.

I have been emailing my management company and can't help but feel I am being told to f$%k off. They have apparently been "negotiating" a contract with Sky for the past 5 or 6 years.

Here is the exchange between us:

Me:

Hi xxxx,

I live in the Waxworks in Ashtown and looked into getting a broadband service, specifically UPC. I found out the only cable service I could get is Cablewatch . I cannot understand why in my own home I am unable to avail of other cable providers when the technology is right there. I am sure you are well aware of the unsatisfactory level of service Cablewatch provide, given every second apartment has a satellite dish and their extremely unprofessional website.

I know this is not your fault personally but you must empathise that we are being totally ripped off and cheated by this obviously unprofessional business. As the management company, can you enable fair competition in the complex given the demand for it? I am aware of some talks that have been taking place (for a number of years) to get Sky in. I still find this ridiculous, how much red-tape do you have to go through to allow home-owners to select a media service they want. Another reason for enabling alternative cable services is that it reflects badly on you. If several hundred people have to come up with ad-hoc solutions to get a decent provider in their homes, whose fault is that? I am sure you want to maintain a high standard of customer satisfaction, and I feel, by allowing home-owners fair trade in this area, you would have support from the overwhelming majority of people living here.

If you could explain the situation with getting an adequate, alternative cable provider to me I would greatly appreciate it, as would many others in the complex as well.

I look forward to hearing from you,

Thanks for your time

Them:

Hi xxx,

I hope you are well and thank you for your email.

You are right, there were considerabe exchanges between Wyse, Sky and the developers in relation to the installation of Sky in Rathborne Village in the past. I have recently taken over managing the development and am only catching up on this particular issue.

However, at present it will cost in the region of €26,000 to install Sky at Rathborne Village. Unfortunately it is not as straight forward as it seems as ownership of cabling, ducts etc needs to be determined and taken into account. We are exploring all options at present and will revert to the members in due course.

Me:

Thanks for your reply,

I contacted the competition authority about the situation and was advised to read the following page. In summary it says that if 5 years have passed since development, the exclusivity rights of the cable owners are no longer in effect. As there are NTL fittings in all the apartments, is there any reason why UPC cannot install services into the building?

It also says:

Pay-TV providers have the absolute right to decide whether or not to offer service to a development
Surely if there is enough demand (which I am more than certain there is) for UPC services, are UPC free to install any hardware into the building? As there are already cable fittings and the exclusivity rights are up, what is stopping them from offering services to home-owners?

Thank you again for your reply,

Them:

I have checked the information provided to all owners on purchase of their property. The only service provider detailed was Cablewatch.

I reviewed the page below and it refers to exclusivity contracts. This has no bearing on the ownership of the cabling.

Yes after 5 years alternative providers can be implemented, however I note in the third paragraph this is on the basis that a payTV provider is willing to install infrastructure at the development. The payTV provider must have permission from the management company to install infrastructure in the common areas.

In my previous email I advised the cost to install the infrastructure to accommodate Sky was recently quoted to be in the region of €26,000.

Please be advised we are exploring all avenues to provide an alternative provider and will revert to all residents in due course.

Me:

Hi xxx,

Can you confirm if UPC have been one of the avenues you have explored? If so, what was the reason for them being ruled out?

After being in touch with them myself, they said they would be willing to install any hardware if the management company were to give them permission.

I am aware you have quoted a price for Sky, however, UPC is a different service with a separate set-up and requirements.

I would appreciate a reply soon as soon as possible as this issue and it's handling by those involved will be discussed at a community meeting next week.

Thanks

Them:

xxx,

Thank you for your email.

UPC have not been approached to date as considerable time and effort has gone into negotiating a contract with Sky.

I appreciate UPC are willing to install their own hardware but it is not that simple. For instance who will maintain their equipment? Do they expect the management company to maintain after the initial installation? How much would maintenance cost per annum? If their dish was damaged who pays for the replacement? is the development suitable to have UPC? Wyse have spent months thrashing these questions out with Sky to date.

As stated previously we will revert to members when we have more favourable news.

Me:

Hi xxx,

Thanks for your reply. I can understand that effort has gone into negotiating a contract with Sky but these talks have been going into years. It seems that after all this time that discussions with Sky have been totally fruitless.

Would it be possible for you or wyse to contact UPC with the issues you raised in your previous e-mail? Perhaps they have had more experience with the current situation and could potentially offer a far better solution at a cheaper cost.

I appreciate your time and look forward to hearing from you,

So where does this leave us? It seems like that because the company has put so much "time and effort" into "exploring all avenues", and working out a contract with Sky (which they don't seem to keen on following either) that nothing can / will be done.

Edit

I am primarily interested in broadband. I am currently forking out €55 a month for Eircom's 24Mb deal (while only receiving 11Mb :P)

seamus

Sounds like a lot of stupidity and mismanagement going on. It sounds ridiculous if the existing cable provider have ownership of the cabling within the blocks, but then given the behaviour of builders over the last 15 years it wouldn't surprise me.

I know Sky do a deal whereby they install a dish in the block and the install cost is spread out or free. They called to me one day and said that if I could convince four other owners (I think that was the number) to sign up to Sky, the installation for all of us would be free.

http://www.sky.com/ireland/boxes/skyinyourapartment/

Worth doing some investigation of your own. All installation still needs to be approved by the management company, but if you can find an alternative way of getting it done quickly and cheaply, they'll probably go for it.

djimi

First thing Id be doing would be to find out from the management company where they are reaching the figure of €26k, because that seems high to me.

Sounds to me like you need to stop with the emails, get enough like minded homeowners together, call a meeting of the management company and sit down and discuss the matter properly. As a homeowner you have the power to vote for changes of this nature with the management company (you are the management company after all), so use that power.

djimi

seamus wrote: »

I know Sky do a deal whereby they install a dish in the block and the install cost is spread out or free. They called to me one day and said that if I could convince four other owners (I think that was the number) to sign up to Sky, the installation for all of us would be free.

I was told the same by Sky. The impression I got was that they very much knew it was in their interest to get the infrastructure in place, as they are the ones who be benefiting from it. I cant imagine UPC feel any differently.

LooksLikeRain

If there are many dishes\antenna already illegally erected in the development it makes no business sense for SKY or UPC to install their equipment. The fact that these illegal dishes are prevelant means the management agent is ineffective in enforcing the terms of leases. Why would any owner sign up to a contract with SKY or UPC using the managment company equipment when they cant enforce the terms of the lease.
Also the 26k seems dubious. This may be from a SKY registered installer but does not seem correct from SKY direct.
If the managment agent cannot control the simple issue of dishes, I would say the accounts of the managemnt company are in bad shape so TV monopolies will be the least of your problems in the future.

cson

WYSE are an absolute disaster to deal with imo. Incompetent doesn't even begin to describe it.

seamus

Yeah, my suspicion here is that the management company approached a Sky registered installer asking for a raw cost for an install, instead of going to Sky and saying, "We have at least 30 units here who want Sky and will sign up if you install it".

This is why I think it would be worth the OP ringing Sky himself and seeing what the story is.

ajones

LooksLikeRain wrote: »

If there are many dishes\antenna already illegally erected in the development it makes no business sense for SKY or UPC to install their equipment. The fact that these illegal dishes are prevelant means the management agent is ineffective in enforcing the terms of leases. Why would any owner sign up to a contract with SKY or UPC using the managment company equipment when they cant enforce the terms of the lease.

The dishes are only prevalent on one the side of the buildings with the line of sight. I'm sure there are loads of residents who don't even have Sky as an option because of this.

ajones

(Management Company) I appreciate UPC are willing to install their own hardware but it is not that simple. For instance who will maintain their equipment? Do they expect the management company to maintain after the initial installation? How much would maintenance cost per annum? If their dish was damaged who pays for the replacement? is the development suitable to have UPC? Wyse have spent months thrashing these questions out with Sky to date.

I wonder why the management company couldn't have "explored all options" with these questions. It seems Sky is the only company in question here and the management company are just bypassing the situation completely.

The OP said "After being in touch with them myself, they said they would be willing to install any hardware if the management company were to give them permission."

Surely this is a reason for the management company to contact UPC and "explore" this option as it's clear that a resident is unhappy with a service in the area.

Seems like the management company are twiddling their thumbs when there's an issue out of the ordinary being raised.

Lantus

LooksLikeRain wrote: »

If there are many dishes\antenna already illegally erected in the development it makes no business sense for SKY or UPC to install their equipment. The fact that these illegal dishes are prevelant means the management agent is ineffective in enforcing the terms of leases. Why would any owner sign up to a contract with SKY or UPC using the managment company equipment when they cant enforce the terms of the lease.
Also the 26k seems dubious. This may be from a SKY registered installer but does not seem correct from SKY direct.
If the managment agent cannot control the simple issue of dishes, I would say the accounts of the managemnt company are in bad shape so TV monopolies will be the least of your problems in the future.

sky will normally remove the individual dishes and facilitate a switch over to the communal system once it is in place. Existing contracts are not affected. There is no real impact on the unit owner.

tomselleck101

There is a owners meeting on tonight, any suggestions for useful questions to ask would be appreciated!

Eric Cartman

ask for the management company to clarify in writing who owns the infrastructure in the ground .

Also ask the management company to give a written assurance that no director of the management company is a director, associate or relation of a director or any other associate of cablewatch. (as there may be a reason that they have the deal )

Also I think the waxworks is blocks of duplex apartments of 4 if i recall , if you could get the other 3 in your block to agree to a shared satellite install (1 dish between all )

or upc could cable to the road if the ducting is owned by the management company.

Ive installed distributed satellite and cable systems in small apartment blocks before , and 26k seems very excessive

uberwolf

We had NTL wired into our apartments when we moved in. Sky installed, for free, a few years later on the basis that Seamus has linked to. Satellite on the roof.

We never got either hooked up in to the apartment, so I don't know the process from the roof into the apartment, but I never heard anyone giving out about it either so it must have been reasonable enough.

LooksLikeRain

Its a public company so the details are public. Details form solocheck. The directors of the comapny are not directors of any other company.
.

Summary

Cablewatch Limited was set up on Fri the 25th of Jul 2003 in Dublin 14. Their current status is Normal. The company's current directors Una McGowran and Jimmy McGowran have been the director of 0 other Irish companies between them. According to our records, Cablewatch Limited has not had judgments registered against it for Bad Debts in the past 6 years. Cablewatch Limited has 2 shareholders.
Company Vitals

Company Name:Cablewatch Limited
Time in Business:10 Years
Company Number:373966
Size:Small (Balance sheet total does not exceed 4.4m)
Current Status:Normal
Principal Activity:[92.20] Radio And Television Activities
May Trade As:Cablewatch Ltd

Registered Address:Dundrum House,
57 Main Street,
Dundrum,
Dublin 14

zg3409

How did you get on, at the owners meeting?

There is a limit to how long a company can have a monopoly. Basically after 2 years, no matter what the contract signed, other providers can provide access. They probably cannot use the old providers actual cable, depending on who owns it, but they could provide a competing service.

http://www.tca.ie/images/uploaded/documents/E_09_001_Pay-TV_Exclusivity_Decision_Note.pdf

Your main interest is UPC. Is there UPC internet available in nearby locations (Freephone 1908)

UPC may not be that keen to install, especially if it will involve a large costs. The main reasons they won't could be
1) No one available to do specialised installations (requires special teams)
2) Some people already have Sky
3) Some people already have Cable TV
4) Everyone is broke so even existing UPC customers are leaving.

UPC broadband only is very exepensive (about 45 per month)

Have you compared all broadband options, 3G, 4G, Fixed wireless, Wimax, Phone line ADSL etc?

markpb

the_syco wrote: »

Maybe an idea to pay the €5 or whatever, and get the list of directors of Cablewatch LTD from the CRO.ie website, and compare to the list of directors on your management company, in case someone has other interests?

There's an old saying about not blaming corruption when incompetence is more likely. When we were with Wyse, I found them great at the day to day stuff but if we (as directors) asked for anything beyond that, they always found ways to frustrate us. Even the simplest of things took ages, there were always problems that were insurmountable, quotes couldn't be sought for work for mysterious reasons or things took so long that they were forgotten.

I'm not saying they did anything wrong or for the wrong reasons, they just hated taking on extra work. I suspect that's what happened in this case. Wyse didn't want the hassle of dealing with Sky/UPC, didn't want to manage the installation of the equipment and didn't want to answer any calls from residents (some will ring to find out how it works, to try to pay, to complain that it was done at all or to complain that it was done without their input, etc). It's much easier just to say that the OMC would have to pay and it would cost <insert large figure here>.

zg3409

Another couple of things that also come to mind.

If the price for Sky is 26K, then most management companies do not have the money. Often tenants cannot pay the management company basic fee and so companies have problems paying insurance, bin charges, communal lighting, lifts etc. They are usually fire fighting and fending off complaining tenants. Optional stuff goes on the long finger.

There are threads on boards.ie technology - satellite section about Sky in your apartment. In some cases it may be free, but be warned it is not without risks and costs. The main drawback is if you do not pay Sky, they cut it off, including RTE. Some people advise it's best to get a Satellite system that includes a saorview Aerial (Sky does not do this) and then if you cancel people can still get the Irish channels and the Free UK channels without paying Sky anything. Other drawbacks is often Sky only install one cable per apartment, meaning you can only record or watch one thing at a time. Two cables should really be the minimum, and ideally a third to bedroom.

Muahahaha

OP forget about the management company and go and put a dish up. If they take it down then tell them you will sue them for infringing your human rights to have access to religious services. There is already EU case law on this from a case in Sweden. EU case law trumps Irish law every time so don't worry about any excuses they tell you- all you have to do is point them towards the Swedish case and the management companies lawyers will soon realise you are right and will advise them not to lay a finger on your dish or it could cost them thousands in damages.
Its a simple as that, don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Here is the case, send the management company the link and they will soon tow your line. If they want to fight you in the ECHR then it will cost them thousands, a risk they are not likely to take
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/Society/article695968.eceo

seamus

^^
That only applies to disabled persons who can't otherwise easily access religious services.

Besides, I'm sure the OP wants to do this the correct way rather than fraudulently abusing the ECHR just to get satellite telly.

zg3409

The OP is looking for fast broadband, not TV

The_Conductor

zg3409 wrote: »

The OP is looking for fast broadband, not TV

Telecom Eireann (shudder) may be an option?

tomselleck101

zg3409 wrote: »

How did you get on, at the owners meeting?

There is a limit to how long a company can have a monopoly. Basically after 2 years, no matter what the contract signed, other providers can provide access. They probably cannot use the old providers actual cable, depending on who owns it, but they could provide a competing service.

http://www.tca.ie/images/uploaded/documents/E_09_001_Pay-TV_Exclusivity_Decision_Note.pdf

Your main interest is UPC. Is there UPC internet available in nearby locations (Freephone 1908)

UPC may not be that keen to install, especially if it will involve a large costs. The main reasons they won't could be
1) No one available to do specialised installations (requires special teams)
2) Some people already have Sky
3) Some people already have Cable TV
4) Everyone is broke so even existing UPC customers are leaving.

UPC broadband only is very exepensive (about 45 per month)

Have you compared all broadband options, 3G, 4G, Fixed wireless, Wimax, Phone line ADSL etc?

Hey sorry for not replying sooner, the meeting was pretty fruitless, they just said that (A long time ago in a Galaxy far far away...) NTL didn't put an exchange in because a canal was in the way .

So since then, they tried Sky, but there was so much going back and forth that Sky passed them on to an authorised reseller (definitely not the exact wording, but I'm pretty sure it was the same thing) and that's where the crazy price is coming from.

One of the people on the council thing said that he shouldn't open his mouth and he would regret saying it, but, he might have possibly maybe heard that UPC are potentially considering putting an exchange in somewhere.

For anyone interested, I am currently with Eircom, fibre won't be available until q1 or q2 of 2014 (which will also go through coaxial cable leaving us in the same situation?).

I am paying for 24Mb but "my line is only capable of 15Mb". I usually get 11Mb on a speed test.

The management company emailed me and said they could contact UPC but not to get my hopes up because the talks can go on for months (I think they were just trying to get me to f$3k off).

zg3409

Eircom eFibre comes through your phone wires. Their TV service also comes via the phone wires. You need to be very close to the nearest telephone street cabinet (within a few hundred metres)

tomselleck101

zg3409 wrote: »

Eircom eFibre comes through your phone wires. Their TV service also comes via the phone wires. You need to be very close to the nearest telephone street cabinet (within a few hundred metres)

Oh whoops silly me. I believe there is one literally outside my apartment building, do you reckon it isn't being used at the moment if my line is only "capable" of 15Mb currently?

the world wonders

tomselleck101 wrote: »

Oh whoops silly me. I believe there is one literally outside my apartment building, do you reckon it isn't being used at the moment if my line is only "capable" of 15Mb currently?

They will need to install a new "fibre" cabinet beside the old one (this is what they look like), once this is done you should get close to the advertised 70Mb efibre speed if you are that close to the cabinet. Once the cabinet is upgraded eFibre works over the existing copper phone line to your apartment so you shouldn't need the cooperation of your management company to get eircom TV.

tomselleck101

the world wonders wrote: »

They will need to install a new "fibre" cabinet beside the old one (this is what they look like), once this is done you should get close to the advertised 70Mb efibre speed if you are that close to the cabinet. Once the cabinet is upgraded eFibre works over the existing copper phone line to your apartment so you shouldn't need the cooperation of your management company to get eircom TV.

Yeah there's one outside alright. According to Eircom's roll-out map, Rathborne should be good to go January / March.

Still depressing to be lumped with poxy Eircom again.

ted1

tomselleck101 wrote: »

Hey sorry for not replying sooner, the meeting was pretty fruitless, they just said that (A long time ago in a Galaxy far far away...) NTL didn't put an exchange in because a canal was in the way .

So since then, they tried Sky, but there was so much going back and forth that Sky passed them on to an authorised reseller (definitely not the exact wording, but I'm pretty sure it was the same thing) and that's where the crazy price is coming from.

One of the people on the council thing said that he shouldn't open his mouth and he would regret saying it, but, he might have possibly maybe heard that UPC are potentially considering putting an exchange in somewhere.

For anyone interested, I am currently with Eircom, fibre won't be available until q1 or q2 of 2014 (which will also go through coaxial cable leaving us in the same situation?).

I am paying for 24Mb but "my line is only capable of 15Mb". I usually get 11Mb on a speed test.

The management company emailed me and said they could contact UPC but not to get my hopes up because the talks can go on for months (I think they were just trying to get me to f$3k off).

Why don't you contact UPC, tell them the scenario. See what possibilities there are. If they think there is a profit to have they'll do the work and you'll know the craic so can talk to other residents and get WYSE to do their job or get replaced at the next AGM

tomselleck101

ted1 wrote: »

Why don't you contact UPC, tell them the scenario. See what possibilities there are. If they think there is a profit to have they'll do the work and you'll know the craic so can talk to other residents and get WYSE to do their job or get replaced at the next AGM

I've been on to UPC a few times, they pretty much tell me that I have to contact the management company. They haven't told me whether it would be technically possible / in their interests.

djimi

tomselleck101 wrote: »

I've been on to UPC a few times, they pretty much tell me that I have to contact the management company. They haven't told me whether it would be technically possible / in their interests.

You are part of the management company. Get a letter from a director or something if that helps; basically get yourself deligated as the person to try and get this sorted, because it doesnt sound like anyone else has any interest in taking it on.

odds_on

Muahahaha wrote: »

OP forget about the management company and go and put a dish up. If they take it down then tell them you will sue them for infringing your human rights to have access to religious services. There is already EU case law on this from a case in Sweden. EU case law trumps Irish law every time so don't worry about any excuses they tell you- all you have to do is point them towards the Swedish case and the management companies lawyers will soon realise you are right and will advise them not to lay a finger on your dish or it could cost them thousands in damages.
Its a simple as that, don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Here is the case, send the management company the link and they will soon tow your line. If they want to fight you in the ECHR then it will cost them thousands, a risk they are not likely to take
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/Society/article695968.eceo

If I remember correctly, there was a thread some time ago about fixing dishes to the outside wall of an apartment block.
The management company are not prevent an owner from using a satellite dish; they are preventing you from drilling holes in their property.
An owner is not denied the use of a dish but is denied fixing it to the wall of a management company's property.
You can use a dish to receive signals, but the dish would probably have to be mounted on a stand in the apartment. Not very pleasant but you still get a signal - if you have a south east facing window!

riclad

i know someone they had one choice upc,
AFTER 3 years a sky dish was installed on the roof ,to serve the whole building ,
you can choose sky or upc.
AS stated a mini dish on a balcony ,or inside a room facing window ,
if it faces the right direction, will pick up sky tv
MINI dish is 53cm wide.http://www.satcure.co.uk/tech/dishes.htm

my friend put a mini dish on the roof ,without permission ,
told no one.used 3 bolts.
to get sky tv for 3 years, ,he lives on the top floor of the block.
A sky reciever without a sub still gets, free news,music, film channels.