# Forced to remove satellite dish?



## ButtermilkJa

Just wondering if anyone else has received a letter from their management company telling them to remove satellite dishes from balconies as they are in breach of the lease agreement? has it ever been followed through?

I've been told they will be removed in 7 days by the management company and the cost sent to me... €85.


----------



## Sue Ellen

If you have a read of the previous threads on satellite dishes you might get some info.


----------



## CCOVICH

Was followed through several times in a development where I lived.


----------



## ButtermilkJa

Thanks for the replies. I've been reading a number of the previous threads and there's some great info.

I knew at the time I bought my apt that no dishes were allowed and I was ok with that. Didn't bother me either way. However, I was forced to sign up for Chorus or have no TV. The apt was piped for Chorus and I was told NTL or any other service was not available in the development. I reluctantly signed for Chorus but after months of frustrating service, poor reception, no additional channels etc etc etc, I decided to go for Sky. I looked around the estate and saw numerous dishes erected and as the estate was a few years old I thought it would not be an issue. I do realise just because everybody is doing it doesn't make it right, but I went for it anyway.

Now I receive this heavy-handed letter telling me to remove it within 7 days or else. Considering that every time I try to contact the management company about something I'm ignored or told 'Sorry there's nothing we can do...' I find this quite insulting to be honest.

I do realise they are within their rights, so I suppose the only thing I can do is ask them nicely to allow me to see out my contract with Sky... another 7 months.


----------



## BlueSpud

Why not try & get some of your other issues resolved in return for taking down the dish.


----------



## ButtermilkJa

I would try that only they were small issues which I ended up resolving each time myself.

I wonder if a note was posted in all residents post boxes then perhaps we could call an EGM as suggested and vote on it. Perhaps if most people are in favour of keeping them then perhaps we could try and change the rules.

Although to be honest I'd imagine the Management Company are only reacting to residents complaints so perhaps this approach is not worth trying?


----------



## Gabriel

Personally I'd get just as heavy handed with the management company. Get onto them and give them absolute hell over the phone. And I do mean hell. You might be in breach of the contract but to be honest it's obvious that you have little choice in the matter in terms of quality of TV so I don't think it's as black and white as they're making out. Tell them they'll remove the dish over your dead body and if they continue with the heavy handed and insulting approach you will be onto Joe Duffy and the Sunday World yadda yadda. You'd be surprised how this type of barking back approach can change their tune.

At the end of the day what have you got to lose? They ignore you anyway so being on bad turns with them makes no differnce.


----------



## lorna

what about the option of a communal sky dish.  i know that here in the UK, they do the installation for free if 3 or more flats in a block sign up ?


----------



## thos

Get yourself one of these:


I have one on balcony, mgmt have never noticed it.


----------



## ButtermilkJa

thos said:


> Get yourself one of these:
> 
> 
> I have one on balcony, mgmt have never noticed it.


Ha, that's a great little device. To be honest though it's still a sattelite dish and I'd have the same issue I reckon.


----------



## KalEl

Maybe you should have some respect for your fellow residents and comply with your lease?!
Not being able to have a satellite dish or dry clothes on your balcony is annoying but comes with the territory. It's unsightly and lowers the tone of the complex...do the decent thing and take it down.


----------



## ontour

That digiglobe is cool !

Just a reminder to the likes of Gabriel, a management company is a collection of the residents who look after everyones interest.

I reckon you should buy one of the digiglobes and bring it to a residents meeting, it might be a happy compromise which still maintains the aesthetic concerns that they have


----------



## Guest112

_*It's unsightly and lowers the tone of the complex...do the decent thing and take it down.*_

For real ? lowering the tone ..........................................
Sure its only a block of flats, Lighten up.


----------



## thos

ButtermilkJa said:


> Ha, that's a great little device. To be honest though it's still a sattelite dish and I'd have the same issue I reckon.



Well to be completely pedantic about it, it's actually a 'globe antenna'. There are some more pics here:

http://www.ddelec.com/digiglobe.htm

If you can put a new light on your balcony, you can put one of these up.


----------



## rob30

I am a director on my management company and find the attutide of a lot of the others to be verging on the fascist. I have a sneaky clothes line. I heard them telling other to buy tumble driers, but I feel like forcing a vote, using the carbon emission argument.
I seriously would consider contacting sky about a communal dish. The other here have agreed in principle to that. I do agree that each place having its own dish does lower the tone a bit, but NTL and chorus can get away with very poor service because of these rules.


----------



## KalEl

APHRODITE said:


> _*It's unsightly and lowers the tone of the complex...do the decent thing and take it down.*_
> 
> For real ? lowering the tone ..........................................
> Sure its only a block of flats, Lighten up.


 
I live an apartment complex and have NTL which I don't like at all. What I want is Sky+ but I can't have it because it's the collective view of the residents that satellite dishes all over the place are unsightly and would lower the tone of the complex. I happen to agree with this.
Similarly having to dry laundry in my spare room is not ideal as it leads to damp etc. But I don't dry clothes on the balcony out of respect for others as it looks horrendous.
Imagine how annoying it is for people who follow the rules to see satellite dishes and laundry?
Communal living is about respect for your neighbours...if you want a satellite dish, buy a house. Otherwise get cable like the rest of your neighbours have to.


----------



## r2d2

this thread brings me back to the old question "What do you call the little box on a satellite dish" ?..................."A council house" !


----------



## ButtermilkJa

KalEl said:


> Maybe you should have some respect for your fellow residents and comply with your lease?!...


First of all I do have respect for my fellow resident's. More respect than any of them would ever have for me to be perfectly honest.


KalEl said:


> ...It's unsightly and lowers the tone of the complex...do the decent thing and take it down.


Absolute nonsense imo. It's a small dish 2 foot wide that you can hardly notice as you drive by my apartment. As it's a Sky dish it's black and blends in quite well.

Granted, some people may find it unsightly, but I find a 15-year-old rusted banger parked outside someone's house unsightly but I don't ask them to remove it or tell them to buy a new car or I will remove their old one and post them the bill!


----------



## johnnyg

what i do find interesting and seems to be missed is that the appartment was perewired for chorus and the buyers don't seem to be given a choice, which i believe is illegal if this was not bought to your attention in the contract. What i would like to know if the management company is receiving a cut/commission for giving chorus sole TV rights to the complex, which would be more of an issue than giving the reason that they are unsightly, which i find a bit lame to be honest...check you contract also is the management company in the residents hands or builders?


----------



## CCOVICH

The Competition Authority was contacted on the issue of TV service provision in the case of our former development and wasn't interested apparently.  I don't see the NCA having anything to say on the issue either.

NTL were ready and willing to provide a service only when the development was handed over to the owners, but not before that time.

Now that NTL and Chorus are one and the same, that won't make much difference to anyone who has Chorus.

As far as I know, there is nothing illegal about one cable provider having exclusive access to a given development.  If the development has been handed over to the owners, it may be in there hands if they wish to get a new provider, or change the rules in the lease.

This presupposes that any contracts (with the cable provider and the leasehold agreement) can be varied at will.


----------



## Gabriel

ontour said:
			
		

> Just a reminder to the likes of Gabriel, a management company is a collection of the residents who look after everyones interest.



I live in a complex run by a management company so I know what it is.



			
				rob30 said:
			
		

> I am a director on my management company and find the attutide of a lot of the others to be verging on the fascist.



My view on most of them as well to be honest. They are usually an appointed body set up by the developers. As is the case in my own circumstances.

Isn't it funny that in a complex where there are both houses, apartments and duplexs literally side by side, if you live in a house you can stick a dirty big dish on the front of your house, but not so in a duplex or apt??? 

For all those on their high horses about communal living...first up - lighten up a little. I'd personally view these types of rules as guielines and no more. The key to communal living is finding solutions to problems...not imposing draconion rules. If everyone starts getting a sky dish and the place looks unsightly then it should be up to the management company to look at a communal dish!!

And in relation to what makes a good neighbour...as someone who lives in a high density area, I'm far more concerned with people who won't fix dodgy sensors for their house and car alarms. Or neighbours with children who scream with all their windows and doors open and think this is acceptable. Maybe instead of imposing silly rules about how the place looks people should be more worried about actually being neighbourly and thinking about the noise levels they contribute to the neighbourhood?

Ok...I've gone off topic now  To the OP, I reiterate, don't pay attention to the nonsense surrounding this issue. Stand your ground and get lippy with the management company. They are not a dictatorship and you'll more than likely find that standing up to them will work for you.


----------



## Thrifty1

> I'd personally view these types of rules as guielines and no more


 
They are not guidelines they are rules,and thank God for them. I live in a complex also and if everybody was allowed to do what they wanted the place would be a disgrace.

Satellite dishes are unsightly - end of story, as is clothes drying on the balcony. Its not a matter of lighening up, its a matter of keeping the complex to a certain standard.

They are not silly rules they are necessary and are for the good of everyone living there.

Would you like it if you were selling your apt in a few years and potential buyers were subjected to a sea of dishes and clothes on every balcony?


----------



## Gabriel

Thrifty1 said:


> Would you like it if you were selling your apt in a few years and potential buyers were subjected to a sea of dishes and clothes on every balcony?



This is a myth though isn't it? A worst case scenario really. 

Like I said I live in a high density complex which is an even mix of houses, duplexes and apartments all side by side. There are a number of each of these units that have dishes. Yet...the sky (excuse the pun) is not awash with satellite dishes. We are not overcome with the things!! Does every house have a satellite dish? No. If you're living in an apartment and the three houses next to you have a dish does this look unsightly? No.

It's not the black and white issue you're painting it with. In my own case I have an alternative (NTL). If people do not have tht viable alternative then it's a rule which needs to be broken! There...I've said it...rules are there to be broken sometimes!


----------



## Carpenter

I am familiar with one large apartment complex and the rules regarding satellite dishes are enforced very rigidly and without exception.  There are other problems associated with sat. dishes (not just their unsightliness), in one case I know of a dish was affixed to the built structure and a cable was affixed to an adjoining roof creating the potential for damage to the roof or a serious fall for the individual concerned.  Most contracts for exclusive TV installation usually involve quite a substantial capital saving for a developer as the appointed supplier supplies and fits the required infrastructrue, thus ensuring that their service is the only one that is available.  In another scheme that I know of a relaxation of the rules was secured by residents who wanted to use clthes airers, which were put away after a certain time.


----------



## wolfspeed

I can't say I agree with the satellite dishes are unsightly argument. I think that lots of people hear an argument and repeat it, without really thinking about it a whole lot. Where does it end? What about a clapped out car? Is that unsightly?

I know that there is a need for some form of rules for communal living, but surely the developers need to be put under a bit more pressure to come up with solutions for prospective tennants. 

Seems to me that the simplest solution is arrived at from the point of view of the developer. If a service company like NTL then knows there are no other options for the residents of a particular complex, maybe they don't give the same level of service as a customer who has the option of switching?


----------



## galwaytt

I too have a house in a develpment with a mgmt company.......

First, the management company are YOUR customer, not the other way around.   If the residents ain't happy - change the company.   Not happy with the rules - change the rules, too.

KalEl - I don't know what planet your on, but who said it's leased?  If it's his property it's his.  Indeed, even if it's leased, legally it's his while he's paying for it.   The management company cannot enter your property or interfere with your property, or else you can sue them for both trespass and malicious damage.    They can ask you all they like to remove the dish, but only you can give permission to touch it.  No permission, no touchy-touchy.    

OP - write - and phone, but definately write (it's the only record of note..), and advise them that they are prohibited from entering or interfering with your property without your written express permission, under pain of litigation.    You might also advise them that if they persist in their manner, you will see to have their contract put out to tender for competitive bids.


----------



## CCOVICH

galwaytt said:


> First, the management company are YOUR customer, not the other way around. If the residents ain't happy - change the company. Not happy with the rules - change the rules, too.


 
First, it's the agent who works for the company. Only the company can change the agent. Who controls the company is a different story. Changing the rules may not be a straighforward as it appears.



			
				galwaytt said:
			
		

> OP - write - and phone, but definately write (it's the only record of note..), and advise them that they are prohibited from entering or interfering with your property without your written express permission, under pain of litigation.


 
Ah but is the balcony your property? I know that in many cases, the balcony is not owned by the apartment owner-it forms part of the common area. Cherry pickers are used to remove dishes, so there may be no case of tresspass etc.


----------



## KalEl

Gabriel said:


> I live in a complex run by a management company so I know what it is.


 
Are you sure you know what it is-the management company as distinct from the management agent?

One satellite dish in itself is not unsightly...but a sea of them across a complex of apartments looks vile, real Ballymun in the sun stuff.
I think some apartment dwellers don't realise they don't actually own the outside walls.

The OP should do the decent thing, take down the dish and have some respect from his neighbours. We had similar problems in our complex which were resolved thankfully...usually it was tenants rather than owner occupiers who tend to have more respect for others.
As for those posters saying rules are there to be broken, or that the rules are merely guidelines...shocking


----------



## KalEl

galwaytt said:


> First, the management company are YOUR customer, not the other way around. If the residents ain't happy - change the company. Not happy with the rules - change the rules, too.
> 
> KalEl - I don't know what planet your on, but who said it's leased? If it's his property it's his. Indeed, even if it's leased, legally it's his while he's paying for it. The management company cannot enter your property or interfere with your property, or else you can sue them for both trespass and malicious damage. They can ask you all they like to remove the dish, but only you can give permission to touch it. No permission, no touchy-touchy.


 
It's clear you have no idea what you're talking about.
Even when you own you're apartment, legally it's a lease. That's why the OP spoke about being in breach of his lease. You don't own anything outside of your apartment...so putting a satellite dish on the outside wall is technically damage to communal property.
Similarly, a management agent is a property management company hired by the management company (i.e. the residents) to manage the complex for a fee.
By the way, KalEl is from the planet Krypton...


----------



## Gabriel

KalEl said:


> As for those posters saying rules are there to be broken, or that the rules are merely guidelines...shocking



Seriously...shocking???

We're not all sheep y'know 

Do the decent thing? I think you're missing the point by a mile. You're still dealing in stereotypes..."a sea of them across a complex of apartments looks vile". Where is this...besides Ballymun? Does the OP's complex have this problem? If it doesn't then where is the unsightliness? 

Just because someone makes a rule doesn't make it right! 

Life is not always about sticking rigidly to the rules y'know. Communal living certainly isn't about sticking rigidly to the rules. Some people are so petty sometimes about very minor issues.


----------



## galwaytt

KalEl said:


> The OP should do the decent thing, take down the dish and have some respect from his neighbours.


 
The OP didn't mention anythiing about his neighbours, except to say a lot of them also had dishes, so it isn't necessarily his neighbours who're the problem. In fact, the mgt agent/company should do the decent thing and approach the residents on the issue - call an EGM if necessary - rather doing, as I suspect, taking every opportunity to attempt to extract the (removal) fee. This is akin to the old speed camera debate...........

And as long as the agent OR company are sending you an annual bill, they are and continue to be, your customer, not the other way 'round. Which means that yes, absolutely some/all of the above can be changed, you just have to get it on the agenda of the AGM or indeed an EGM, and get it done so.

By virtue of the fact that a person owns an apartment, he can rightly assert his claim to influence what happens to that property in common (walls/halls/stairs). Including attaching dishes.  The management agent or company have no legal tenancy on anything related to the building itself, whatsoever.


----------



## KalEl

galwaytt said:


> By virtue of the fact that a person owns an apartment, he can rightly assert his claim to influence what happens to that property in common (walls/halls/stairs). Including attaching dishes. The management agent or company have no legal tenancy on anything related to the building itself, whatsoever.


 
Read some of my earlier posts regarding the distinction between management companies and management agents. Also regarding leases and communal areas.
I'm sorry, but you are just spoofing about something you seem to know little about.


----------



## Thrifty1

galwayatt said:
			
		

> _By virtue of the fact that a person owns an apartment, he can rightly assert his claim to influence what happens to that property in common (walls/halls/stairs). Including attaching dishes. The management agent or company have no legal tenancy on anything related to the building itself, whatsoever._


 
Please take KalEl's advise - management agent are well within their right to insisit the dish is removed.

If you purchase the apt you have a leasehold not a freehold, and you cannot "own" the common areas, which as has been previously stated includes the outside walls.


----------



## Gabriel

Surely, at this point in proceedings, the best argument put forward has been that the management agent, rather than enforcing a rule (which many see as nonsense within certain context) should try and find a viable solution. 

I own a duplex so know the "rules" regarding the walls (which I share with my downstairs neighbour) but that doesn't stop many people from hanging baskets of flowers or indeed satellite dishes out of said walls. Our own management agent seems to have no great issue with this...ie they do not blindly enforce the rule, as they do not see much of it as "an eyesore". 

Those bleating on about the rules might do well to think about 'the rules' in context with reality, rather than harping on about seas of apartments with satellite dishes hanging off every one.


----------



## CCOVICH

So, has anyone made a successful challenge?

And surely solicitors should advise you of this when you sign the leasehold agreement?  Do they?  I can't recall, but I don't think that the 'grey area' part was mentioned by my solicitor.

Perhaps _mf1, MOB _or_ Vanilla_ could give their opinion?


----------



## Olly64

johnnyg said:


> what i do find interesting and seems to be missed is that the appartment was perewired for chorus and the buyers don't seem to be given a choice


 
i was in an apartment and the complex was wired for chourus and dishes were not allowed, then a few days after moving in a chourus rep actually called in to connect me, i thought nothing of it but reading this thread it seems there is something going on between chourus and apartment complexes that does seem illegal


----------



## Gabriel

CCOVICH said:


> So, has anyone made a successful challenge?
> 
> And surely solicitors should advise you of this when you sign the leasehold agreement?  Do they?  I can't recall, but I don't think that the 'grey area' part was mentioned by my solicitor.
> 
> Perhaps _mf1, MOB _or_ Vanilla_ could give their opinion?



You'll note that I edited my last response after posting it...I don't know enough to justifiably talk about the grey areas of the law in this regard so felt it better to change what I'd said. Actually...they do mention it alright, or at least they did in my case. 

The rule in and of itself isn't wrong. It might stop someone from nailing a 60 foot picture of themselves to the side of their apartment for instance  The implementation and policing of the rule is the problem here.


----------



## CCOVICH

What is a viable solution? Assuming that 

(a) there is nothing illegal about exclusive agreements between developers and cable providers (I have yet to hear otherwise from an informed source); 
(b) the developer (in all likelyhood) has _de facto_ control of the management company (even if owners have representation on same) and will not renege on any agreement they have signed with the cable provider (we were told that once the management company was handed over we could get whatever cable provider we wanted, but I would be dubious on this point if there is a contract in place)
(c) in many cases, a Sky dish can be installed without looking like an eyesore. However, what happens when the orinetation of the apartments/duplex etc. is such that dishes have to be bolted to the front wall? 
(d) what about those who do believe that dishes are an eyesore and wish to see the rules that everyone signed up to enforced? Maybe those 'bleating' here actually agree with such rules? As is their right I would have thought. What if _they_ are the majority in the development?

Anyway, it's a discussion that's been had before. The substative issue for the OP is whether or not the management company/agent has the right to remove the dish. I have yet to hear conclusively that (legally) they can't do this.


----------



## galwaytt

Thrifty1 said:


> .. management agent are well within their right to insisit the dish is removed.


 
They are within their right to ask. You are within your right to challenge it, and if necessary, take steps to have the rules changed. And being property in common, you still have an input into it's use/not. There is no other 'ruling' party with irrevocable rights on the issue.

As for taking KalEl's advice, I think not. I've owned a 3 storey townhouse for 6+ years, in a similar scenario, so I've run the gauntlet, worn the T-shirt, seen the video........and my dish is still there and cannot be touched. My opinion is informed by on the ground experience, and what can be done to effect the desire result. KalEl is offering platitudes based on appealing to 'sensibilities'.   Time for others to respect the sensibilities of others in the same position as the OP, really.

CCOVICH, re solrs - not in my experience, initially, but maybe with the proliferation in recent years, the process must be informed by now.........

Gabriel - you're right. Carrot, not stick should be the way to go.


----------



## Lipstick69

This is covered somewhat by the Communications (Regulation) Act 2002 and the recent amendment bill passed by the Dail, and the Access Regulations of 2003. 

Normally, eircom have USO obligations to provide telephone service. There are no similar obligations for cable as some years ago the exclusivity part of their licences were removed. However developers can and do have commercial contracts with other companies (Smart Telecom, Magnet, Chorus etc.). 

Should another operator wish to provide service the company that has the contract has certain obligations to negotiate. In the event of a dispute ComReg is now (as soon as the bill is enacted) given some kind of compliance/ infrastructure sharing type power.


----------



## Round Tuit

I suppose if no-one complains then the mgmt co. won't get them removed. They are as much employed by me as they are by the person who erects the satellite dish or whatever . . . . it's just I'm the one with the leasehold agreement on my side, which I and everyone else who bought signed before taking possession. Let the buyer beware - I assume everyone reads what they sign. 

I for one would complain, and have, especially about the one which went on the front of a ground floor apt, was approx 6 ft in diameter and was only about 5ft off the ground.

It really is the thin edge of the wedge - if you don't believe me take a drive around some areas of Dublin . . . .it's not an urban myth.

PS: even private houses who want to erect a dish on the front of their house are supposed to get planning permission . . . again, if no-one complains they're grand.


----------



## ButtermilkJa

Thanks for all the great replies. Very interesting to hear people's views on the matter.

I think my only option is to write a polite letter to the Management Agent and ask them the reason for the removal of the dish. If they tell me it's for no other reason than a breach of the 'Lessee Agreement' then I shall ask them to call an EGM to discuss the matter with residents before removing the dishes. If the dishes _are_ to be removed then I will ask them to allow me to finish my contract with Sky and remove it then myself.

I don't want to get into an long drawn out arguement with them over this because I know technically I am in the wrong. If it was the other way around I would fight it to the death, believe me.


----------



## CCOVICH

Very interesting _Lipstick69_-nice to see some soild info.

I could be wrong, but there may also be an EU law that entitles citizens/residents to receive broadcasts from their home country.  If the only way to do this is via a dish, well you are entitled to a dish (I'm open to correction on all this).

Of course none of this is relevant if you are an Irish citizen and your cable operator provides RTE etc.


----------



## ang1170

CCOVICH said:


> Very interesting _Lipstick69_-nice to see some soild info.
> 
> I could be wrong, but there may also be an EU law that entitles citizens/residents to receive broadcasts from their home country. If the only way to do this is via a dish, well you are entitled to a dish (I'm open to correction on all this).


 
Not if you've willingly signed a lease agreeing that you won't have a dish.....

I just threw that one in - not meant too seriously, as I wouldn't want to raise the temperature again.  I think most people's reaction to reading this thread would be that it's an excellent example of how easy it is to find agreement where shared space is involved !


----------



## Gabriel

ang1170 said:


> I wouldn't want to raise the temperature again.



I'm outraged by that remark


----------



## CCOVICH

ButtermilkJa said:


> I think my only option is to write a polite letter to the Management Agent and ask them the reason for the removal of the dish. If they tell me it's for no other reason than a breach of the 'Lessee Agreement' then I shall ask them to call an EGM to discuss the matter with residents before removing the dishes. If the dishes _are_ to be removed then I will ask them to allow me to finish my contract with Sky and remove it then myself.


 
I think that's reasonable.


----------



## shesells

I'm with KalEl and Thrifty. You signed a legal agreement (lease/deed of sale) which stated that dishes were not allowed but still you went ahead and put one up and now YOU are feeling hard done by? Give me a break!

Part of the reason we bought where we live is that dishes aren't allowed, nor are clothes lines nor any antenna/aerial (or hanging basket) and you know what - the place looks great! 

Buttermilkja - Would you sign a contract for a job that said you work 38 hours but decide you would only like to work 20 hours, because you preferred it that way? What gives you the right to decide you can change the rules to suit yourself. You want to call and EGM, not an easy thing to do....read your lease and do some company law research.

If the dish is that much of a problem, move to somewhere they allow those flocks of dishes. As for the Sky subscription....you took a risk and got caught. An expensive lesson to learn.


----------



## ButtermilkJa

shesells said:


> I'm with KalEl and Thrifty. You signed a legal agreement (lease/deed of sale) which stated that dishes were not allowed but still you went ahead and put one up and now YOU are feeling hard done by? Give me a break!


No, I never said I was feeling hard done by really. Just annoyed that they are heavy handed about it and not looking for a solution which will suit all. I feel more hard done by about the fact that they don't help very much when you contact them but when they want something they jump down your throat.



> Part of the reason we bought where we live is that dishes aren't allowed, nor are clothes lines nor any antenna/aerial (or hanging basket) and you know what - the place looks great!


  LOL, sorry to be so dismissive but you're running off with yourself there a bit.

Firstly, I had much more important things to worry about when deciding to buy than whether it allowed dishes or not. If that was a priority for you then fair enough.

Secondly, stop bringing in extras like hanging out clothes on the balcony etc. You're just trying to colour your arguement as far as I'm concerned. I never ever mentioned this. It's a small 2ft wide black sat dish that's barely noticeable.

Thirdly, the estate I live in has plenty of Sky dishes around the properties and to be perfectly honest, it's one of the best kept estates around. The dishes don't make _any_ difference whatsoever.



> Buttermilkja - Would you sign a contract for a job that said you work 38 hours but decide you would only like to work 20 hours, because you preferred it that way? What gives you the right to decide you can change the rules to suit yourself. You want to call and EGM, not an easy thing to do....read your lease and some company law info on www.cro.ie


 Bad comparison.
I never said I had the right to change the rules to suit myself.
I've read my lease.



> If the dish is that much of a problem, move to somewhere they allow those flocks of dishes. As for the Sky subscription....you took a risk and got caught. An expensive lesson to learn.


 Sure, I'll move house just to receive Sky.  Yes, it may well be an expensive lesson. For myself and possibly tens/hundreds of others in the estate. This what I'm trying to avoid. If a lot of people are happy with dishes then why not try to come to some arrangement rather than bowing down to people who just shout rules at you!


----------



## shesells

Rules are rules. You signed up to rules that said no dishes and are p*ssed that they're trying to enforce that rule...I know management agents can be useless at the best of times but satellite dish removal is a much more visible sign of activity to help justify their charges! 

I wasn't trying to colour my argument, simply addressing additional issues brought up in this thread by other posters.

I still disagree with you about dishes being ugly....regardless of size they are an unattractive addition to any building. If there are loads of other dishes in your estate then I'm sure they received similar letters. Here they took down 12 in one day.

You said you want to call an EGM to change the rules..which would allow you keep your dish...ergo you want to change the rules to suit yourself.

It amazes me how few people take the legal documents they sign when buying property seriously. You admit you knew dishes weren't allowed but rather than stick to the rule you want to change it. But you signed a legal document to say you'd abide by the rules....

Good luck with your challenge...if it works out let us know.


----------



## KalEl

galwaytt said:


> As for taking KalEl's advice, I think not. I've owned a 3 storey townhouse for 6+ years, in a similar scenario, so I've run the gauntlet, worn the T-shirt, seen the video........and my dish is still there and cannot be touched. My opinion is informed by on the ground experience, and what can be done to effect the desire result. KalEl is offering platitudes based on appealing to 'sensibilities'. Time for others to respect the sensibilities of others in the same position as the OP, really.


 
What relevance does you having a satellite dish on the outer wall of your house have?
The whole point if this is when you own an apartment you don't own the outer walls. Sticking a satellite dish on communal property and breaching your lease is unacceptable. I doubt anyone would like to see dishes on every apartment.
Why respect the sensibilities of someone who is carrying on like they own something they actually don't?


----------



## ButtermilkJa

Look, to be honest, I really don't want to get into arguement here about the issue. I was just looking for examples of people who have run into the same problem.

I must come across like a spoilt brat who always gets his own way if you think that I'm just doing this so I can change the rules to suit myself. I'm sorry if that's how I'm sounding but that's not what this is all about.

All I'm trying to do is address a rule that is ridiiculous and outdated and due to the fact that many residents have dishes it is a clear signal that the rule needs to be discussed and amedned if neccessary rather than simply enforced without regard.

Times change, people change, rules always need to change. If I am the only one looking for this rule to be changed in my estate then I'll shut up and take the dish down, but I'm 100% sure I'm not the only one. Therefore the rule, in my opinion, is not in the best interests of all the residents and needs discussion. I can't put it any simpler.

Anyway, just to fill you in... I've sent an email on the matter to my management agent yesterday afternoon but haven't got a response as yet. I will keep you updated.


----------



## Gabriel

KalEl said:


> What relevance does you having a satellite dish on the outer wall of your house have?
> The whole point if this is when you own an apartment you don't own the outer walls. Sticking a satellite dish on communal property and breaching your lease is unacceptable. I doubt anyone would like to see dishes on every apartment.
> Why respect the sensibilities of someone who is carrying on like they own something they actually don't?



Wow...there's just no budging you on this one is there? You can't see past the rule. The rule is everything...we bow down before the rule! ALL HAIL THE RULE!!!!!  People, in general, not just picking on you, take the word 'legal' to mean some immovable mountain. You signed the document therefore you must die by the rule...yadda yadda. 

Give the OP a break. He/she is gonna do their best to get the rule changed and I wish them the best.


----------



## CCOVICH

_ButtermilkJa_-I for one certainly don't see anything wrong with your approach, nor that you are willing to challenge the rules, and that you can appreciate that not everyone may feel the same way as you.

At this stage, perhaps the best option is to allow people who have been in similar situations with management company rules the chance to comment on how they were enforced, or were they successfully challenged.

There is little to be gained from pointing out ad nauseum that 'rules are rules' etc-the OP sees this, but that doesn't mean that they are not entitled to seek opinion from other residents as to whether the rules can/should be changed.


----------



## ang1170

ButtermilkJa said:


> I must come across like a spoilt brat who always gets his own way if you think that I'm just doing this so I can change the rules to suit myself. I'm sorry if that's how I'm sounding but that's not what this is all about.
> 
> All I'm trying to do is address a rule that is ridiiculous and outdated and due to the fact that many residents have dishes it is a clear signal that the rule needs to be discussed and amedned if neccessary rather than simply enforced without regard.


 
Guys, joking apart, I think you both need to calm down a bit. 

I think the problem is the tone on both sides: it's all very well saying you don't want to come over like a spoiled brat but then you proceed to rant on about "a rule that is ridiiculous and outdated". Clearly, some people don't see it as that, and you should at least acknowledge that.

Maybe you could all just agree:

- if you sign something, you should in general stick to it
- there's no harm in seeking to have it changed
- it would be useful to hear from anyone who did get such a change

If you can't agree to that, then maybe you should just agree to disagree, rather than prolonging this?


----------



## inchbyinch

You can get one satelite mounted on the roof and feed all appartments off that.....you should suggest this as the alternatives to satelite are absolutally substandard.....I would imagine that most of the appartments currently subscribing to Chorus would support this move. Perhaps you can use the existing chorus backbone and feed the sat signal into it.


----------



## ButtermilkJa

ang1170 said:


> ...
> Maybe you could all just agree:
> 
> - if you sign something, you should in general stick to it
> - there's no harm in seeking to have it changed
> - it would be useful to hear from anyone who did get such a change
> 
> ...


Perfectly said... I wonder why I didn't think of that from the start 

But seriously, if you read my first couple of posts this is exactly the way I imagined the thread to progress. But some people are all too willing to have a go at you rather than try and help.

Ok, rant over


----------



## ButtermilkJa

inchbyinch said:


> You can get one satelite mounted on the roof and feed all appartments off that.....you should suggest this as the alternatives to satelite are absolutally substandard.....I would imagine that most of the appartments currently subscribing to Chorus would support this move. Perhaps you can use the existing chorus backbone and feed the sat signal into it.


Who provides this service? Is it Sky? It's been mentioned a few times here alright and I'd be interested to find out more.


----------



## KalEl

ButtermilkJa said:


> All I'm trying to do is address a rule that is ridiiculous and outdated and due to the fact that many residents have dishes it is a clear signal that the rule needs to be discussed and amedned if neccessary rather than simply enforced without regard.


 
In our complex there are no satellite dishes because we get the management agent to remove them immediately. It was discussed at the AGM last year and literally only two people wanted the rule changed. I'm not obsessed with the rule...I along with the vast majority of my neighbours agree with it. A complex with a dish on every apartment looks terrible...that's why the rule is there. Laundry is the same...when it's out on balconies the place looks like a tenement.
I suggested getting a communal dish as I do not like NTL/Chorus at all. It is an inferior servive to Sky. And now with Sky+ it's getting very old school. The problem was getting enough people to agree to that.


----------



## muffin1973

Just read through this thread - Buttermilkja - have you talked to any of your neighbours that still have their dish on their wall?  How have they dealt with it?

M


----------



## inchbyinch

ButtermilkJa said:


> Who provides this service? Is it Sky? It's been mentioned a few times here alright and I'd be interested to find out more.


 
The best people to contact would be a Sky installer. I was designing an apartment block for a developer and he wanted one of these installed. Basically the signal from the dish gets split and distributed around the building accordingly. We contracted this work out to a Sky installer and the developer delt with him directly after this so I'm not sure how it finished up but the developer seemed happy enough the last time I was speaking with him. I'm not sure what deals Sky actually offer on this but I would imagine they would offer something to cover the costs given the business it would generate. Its one definite way of avoiding the "unsightly" nature of a load of dishes hanging off the side of the building. Yellow pages for the sky installers is your best bet!


----------



## CCOVICH

With a communal dish, does everyone have to take the same Sky package?


----------



## KalEl

CCOVICH said:


> With a communal dish, does everyone have to take the same Sky package?


 
No, they don't.


----------



## ButtermilkJa

muffin1973 said:


> Just read through this thread - Buttermilkja - have you talked to any of your neighbours that still have their dish on their wall?  How have they dealt with it?
> 
> M


As far as I'm aware this is the first time the issue has been addressed. I moved into the estate just over two years ago and there were dishes erected then. The estate was about 3 years old at that stage so I'm not sure how long the dishes were there, but nothing has ever been done in the two years+ I've been here.


----------

