Just got sky and told by neighbour property management don't allow it

Eric Cartman

athtrasna wrote: »

It can create a bigger problem as evidenced in a neighbouring development here. Immigrants can't get their satellite channels on a sky feed so they see the sky dishes, take it that dishes are OK and put up their own. Cue more dishes than ever

communal roof dishes are normally the way to go then , pointed at astra2 it lets anyone use freesat / sky / other astra2 services , and with no wall dishes it doesn't encourage people putting up dishes for foreign satellites.

Also the install is quite compact with only one fibre run going to each building and providing 4 outputs with boxes like this :



if the owners got together (perhaps at the request of tenants) sky will come out and install this type system, then everyone has the choice of no sat / freesat or sky and no ugly wall dishes.

athtrasna

Communal dishes were installed for Sky to stop individual dishes. As mentioned in my post

ted1

Because they don't use the Astra 2 sat and require a much larger dish.

ted1

ted1 wrote: »

Because they don't use the Astra 2 sat and require a much larger dish.

You don't need a larger dish to use the hotbird satellite (the most popular after the astra) just needs to be pointed in a different direction. In fact if you get a larger dish, with two LNB's (one pointed at the astra and one at the hotbird) one dish can serve both satellites.

I know of at least one apartment block that has installed this setup meaning residents have access to both satellites and removing the need to install their own. These are the types of things management companies should be installing from day one.

ted1

Lionel Noisy Phlegm wrote: »

You don't need a larger dish to use the hotbird satellite (the most popular after the astra) just needs to be pointed in a different direction. In fact if you get a larger dish, with two LNB's (one pointed at the astra and one at the hotbird) one dish can serve both satellites.

I know of at least one apartment block that has installed this setup meaning residents have access to both satellites and removing the need to install their own. These are the types of things management companies should be installing from day one.

With Astra 2 you can use a mini dish, got Astra 1 or hotbird you need a 80cm dish and if your looking for stuff from outside Europe you'll need a bigger one again.

So yes you need a larger dish

ted1

ted1 wrote: »

With Astra 2 you can use a mini dish, got Astra 1 or hotbird you need a 80cm dish and if your looking for stuff from outside Europe you'll need a bigger one again.

So yes you need a larger dish

As far as I know a mini dish could also pick up hotbird also once it was pointed directly at it.

In any case its not that big a deal to install an 80cm dish anyway from the start as it will most likely be big enough to get you both hotbird and astra 2 at the same time. Sure even if its a massive dish who cares when its on the roof of an apartment block anyway.

Paulw

Mod Note If you want to discuss technical aspects of satellite dishes, then please take it to the digital TV/satellite discussion area. It's not a accommodation discussion.

Lux23

Well actually, your landlord/management company is really supposed to give you the choice, it isn't that big a deal for an apartment block to get a shared dish from UPC and Sky. There are exclusivity deals, but If the deal with the TV company is more than five years, they cannot hold the management company to an exclusivity deal as they will have recouped the cost of installation. Might be a way around it for you.

http://www.ccpc.ie/guidance-pay-tv-exclusivity-apartment-developments

Paulw

Lux23 wrote: »

Well actually, your landlord/management company is really supposed to give you the choice, it isn't that big a deal for an apartment block to get a shared dish from UPC and Sky.

Competition would include Saorview or Eircom eVision TV. Neither require a dish nor external connections that a development wouldn't already have.

So, in that case, they are not obliged to offer Sky as an alternative.

Remind Me Tomorrow

Lux23 wrote: »

Well actually, your landlord/management company is really supposed to give you the choice, it isn't that big a deal for an apartment block to get a shared dish from UPC and Sky. There are exclusivity deals, but If the deal with the TV company is more than five years, they cannot hold the management company to an exclusivity deal as they will have recouped the cost of installation. Might be a way around it for you.

http://www.ccpc.ie/guidance-pay-tv-exclusivity-apartment-developments

Fantastic. It is usually as a result of these exclusivity deals with the likes of the Sky Conway cowboys that lead people to mount dishes through pure exasperation.

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

Remind Me Tomorrow

Paulw wrote: »

Competition would include Saorview or Eircom eVision TV. Neither require a dish nor external connections that a development wouldn't already have.

So, in that case, they are not obliged to offer Sky as an alternative.

What you are suggesting is that they can selectively restrict a provider in favour of another. I'm no expert but I would have thought competition law is all inclusive.

seamus

Competition law applies to service providers, not management companies.

If there's a sweetheart deal between a service provider and a management company, then competition law comes in. But if a management company just isn't bothered providing alternative arrangements, then competition law doesn't apply.

Paulw

Remind Me Tomorrow wrote: »

What you are suggesting is that they can selectively restrict a provider in favour of another. I'm no expert but I would have thought competition law is all inclusive.

Nope, I'm not.

You have a choice -
cable provided already (there are a few different providers, UPC being one)
saorview - rabbit ears will do the job
Eircom eVision - over your phone line
Sky - requires a dish of some sort

So, they are giving you 3 options out of 4, so not in breach of competition law.

In many cases, the "rules" forbidding a dish come from the planning permission granted for the development. Or it may be a development "rule" which was agreed.

Lux23

Paulw wrote: »

Competition would include Saorview or Eircom eVision TV. Neither require a dish nor external connections that a development wouldn't already have.

So, in that case, they are not obliged to offer Sky as an alternative.

But they couldn't use that reason if UPC have a dish already? You would be on very shaky ground and SKY would have the basis of a competition complaint there, because if you let UPC have a dish, why can't you let SKY have one?

Paulw

Lux23 wrote: »

But they couldn't use that reason if UPC have a dish already? You would be on very shaky ground and SKY would have the basis of a competition complaint there, because if you let UPC have a dish, why can't you let SKY have one?

UPC service doesn't use a dish. It's cable. And just because there was a UPC dish (for maybe MMDS if it's still in use), then they don't have an obligation to allow a dish for Sky, or foreign satellite services. Otherwise, you would have to have a dish for every single satellite service.

Lux23

I don't know, I would be inclined to bluster through that argument and get permission for my dish! I reckon there is an argument that you can't block an entrant to the market on the basis of how the service is provided. Although not strictly under competition law.

Paulw

Lux23 wrote: »

I reckon there is an argument that you can't block an entrant to the market on the basis of how the service is provided.

Well, if you take a case to court and win, you may be right. But, to take that case would cost you thousands, before you start.

Until then, the situation remains.

The service is not blocked. You are simply not permitted to mount a dish. There is a big legal difference there.

Lux23

I wouldn't take the case to court, but I would imagine your average management company grunt could be bamboozled by the jargon. No harm in trying.

Paulw

Lux23 wrote: »

I wouldn't take the case to court, but I would imagine your average management company grunt could be bamboozled by the jargon. No harm in trying.

Usually, the "grunt" just does his job and you can explain/discuss your ideas with the management agent. They don't enter in to discussions, they just cut the cables and remove the dish.

Remind Me Tomorrow

Paulw wrote: »

Nope, I'm not.

You have a choice -
cable provided already (there are a few different providers, UPC being one)
saorview - rabbit ears will do the job
Eircom eVision - over your phone line
Sky - requires a dish of some sort

So, they are giving you 3 options out of 4, so not in breach of competition law.

In many cases, the "rules" forbidding a dish come from the planning permission granted for the development. Or it may be a development "rule" which was agreed.

If the residents want, say Sky TV, it's irrelevant whether there is Saorview or not. If the management company refuses to allow Sky TV based on dishes being ugly, or because there is saorview and we can't be arsed with anything else, or because there is an exclusivity agreement with some dodgy cowboys (ahem Sky conway) then I'd be fairly confident they are in breach of competition law. Who is anyone to tell me or the majority of residents in my estate what legal service we can and cannot avail of?

bidiots

When you sign the contract agreeing to it?

Remind Me Tomorrow

bidiots wrote: »

When you sign the contract agreeing to it?

The law supersedes any contract, especially one signed under duress. "Sign it or you lose the house and your deposit". I remember the day clearly.

markpb

Remind Me Tomorrow wrote: »

If the residents want, say Sky TV, it's irrelevant whether there is Saorview or not. If the management company refuses to allow Sky TV based on dishes being ugly, or because there is saorview and we can't be arsed with anything else, or because there is an exclusivity agreement with some dodgy cowboys (ahem Sky conway) then I'd be fairly confident they are in breach of competition law. Who is anyone to tell me or the majority of residents in my estate what legal service we can and cannot avail of?

No-one is telling you that you can't have Sky. They're telling you that you can't affix a dish to someone elses property. If the management company or Sky choose not to provide a communal system, there's no competition law issue there.

Also FWIW I'm not sure your interpretation of competition law is correct. Cable operators signed exclusive deals with developers in countless complexes over the years and I haven't heard of any of them being overturned in court. Have you?

bidiots

Remind Me Tomorrow wrote: »

The law supersedes any contract, especially one signed under duress. "Sign it or you lose the house and your deposit". I remember the day clearly.

What about the law protecting the rights of other people in the estate, that signed the contract, who Dont want dishes hanging off of houses, destroying the aesthetics? Just for arguments sake obv

Remind Me Tomorrow

markpb wrote: »

No-one is telling you that you can't have Sky. They're telling you that you can't affix a dish to someone elses property. If the management company or Sky choose not to provide a communal system, there's no competition law issue there.

I think the discussion has gone beyond the issue of mounting a dish. Many, if not all, new estates come with exclusivity deals barring any other TV providers. Including Saorview I might add. Others are arguing that a amanagement company can ban a specific provider based on the fact that Saorview is available using rabbit ears or eVision with Eircom (which has limited availability by the way), therefore they are not breacing competition law.

Remind Me Tomorrow

bidiots wrote: »

What about the law protecting the rights of other people in the estate, that signed the contract, who Dont want dishes hanging off of houses, destroying the aesthetics? Just for arguments sake obv

Yes I would agree you need the majority of residents. In my estate the residents do not get a say. There is an exclusivity deal, and as far as the management company are concerned that is final. No Sky TV, no UPC, tough sh!t, move house if you are not happy.

zl1whqvjs75cdy

I'd be preparing to cancel the sky if I was you OP. You get a 14 day cooling off period from when the dish is installed to cancel without penalty. After that you will be looking at potentially hefty contract breakage clauses.

Paulw

Remind Me Tomorrow wrote: »

Yes I would agree you need the majority of residents. In my estate the residents do not get a say. There is an exclusivity deal, and as far as the management company are concerned that is final.

But, the unit owners ARE the management company. Maybe you should discuss it with other unit owners at your AGM.

Remind Me Tomorrow

Paulw wrote: »

But, the unit owners ARE the management company. Maybe you should discuss it with other unit owners at your AGM.

No there is an actually private limited company tasked with "managing" the estate. There is also a 2nd limited company which represents the residents and has directors voted for by the residents. Between the management company and the directors there are people calling the shots. We have AGM's but as I've said, there is an exclusivity deal and that is final. We the residents don't get a say.