Access to media

M

Mick31

Registered User
Messages
42
I bought an apartment a year ago and like many other residents erected a satellite dish in order to avail of some channels that are not available through the NTL. I am completely aware that the lease contract states that no aerial or satellite dish is to be erected.

Is this clause in the contract itself in direct contravention with the consumers choice to avail of TV channels that are not available through the NTL? Is this clause in the contract discriminatory? Is there a law that governs access to media?

Thanks
 
There is an EU ruling about the availability of satellite services.
You can read about it here.
It's a live issue throughout the country, there's a long thread about it on Boards.ie here.
Basically the whole thing hinges on the fact that the apartment owner doesn't own the external face of the walls.
It will probably end up in the High Court for a ruling, but it's going to cost somebody a lot of money to get there.
 
Hoagy said:
There is an EU ruling about the availability of satellite services.
You can read about it here.
Click to expand...

I had been looking for that link before-I had a feeling it was raised by an owner in a development where I used to live-it doesn't seem to have much standing though.

Some more reading here, here, and here

It could be worse-some developments have no access to NTL, Chorus or Sky and are stuck with much smaller operators and no digital service etc.
 
Why don't the apartment owners get together through the management company & put up one dish & feed all apartments from the dish . You would then all have access to Satellite & you could choose what you wish to watch or subscribe to other services if you choose
 
Thanks for that.

Yeah, it's true that the owner does not own the external face of the walls, but management company does not either. I think it's classed as common grounds.

If no one complains can they just go on and take it down?
 
Common to all residents, but for exclusive use of the apartment that is servicing it.

Nonetheless, the EU regulation is quite clear on this and it stands to reason that the management companies are in clear breach of this. In contract law, parts that are deemed to be unfair will be cut out, since they are in denial of human rights
 
Mick31 said:
Nonetheless, the EU regulation is quite clear on this and it stands to reason that the management companies are in clear breach of this. In contract law, parts that are deemed to be unfair will be cut out, since they are in denial of human rights
Click to expand...

It's that big building with the dome on the north quays. I'll hold your coat.
 
There is no need to go there. The dish is staying where it is, and I would like to see who is going to jump on my balcony and take it down.
 
I lived in an apartment in town that had communal Sky with one big dish on top. Apart from the odd vandalism and the fact that the management company didn't actually know how to access the dish it worked fine and was certainly better then NTL.

I'm moving to a place with Magnet and I'm slightly appprehensive, I do have the scope to place a dish without it being seen by anyone but its an added eyesore on valuable space.
 
I genuinely believe that this rule is to secure a monopoly for a particular TV provider. No building is ever going to fall due to satellite dish erection, it does look unsighty though, but so do old cars people drive! Having a dish is not about looking nice, but it is about communication.

Ultimately it is developers fault.
 
Mick31 said:
There is no need to go there. The dish is staying where it is, and I would like to see who is going to jump on my balcony and take it down.
Click to expand...

It has been mentioned here previously that management companies have in the past hired cherry pickers to remove dishes, the cost of this is then charged to the apt. owner.

Did you not check this out before buying the apartment? These exclusive agreements are obviously worth money to the developers, and the situation will only change if enough people refuse to buy apartments in such circumstances. Can't see that happening myself though.
Leo
 
I did sign that of course, but did not think I would be deprived of satellite signal. Is that clause illegal?
 
Mick31 said:
I did sign that of course, but did not think I would be deprived of satellite signal. Is that clause illegal?
Click to expand...

It's perfectly legal, you don't own the external shell, so they can say what you are and are not allowed to attach to it.
Leo
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top