1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

D* AT9 5-LNB and HOA Battle

Discussion in 'DIRECTV General Discussion' started by snipes007, Aug 5, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. carl6

    carl6 Moderator Staff Member DBSTalk Club

    12,473
    937
    Nov 15, 2005
    Seattle, WA
    Aesthetics obviously. However as has been clearly noted already, if they are "Not allowing HD dishes" then ALL of the existing dishes must be removed, because all of them are capable of receiving at least some HD channels.

    Your points for argument are:
    1. All of the current dishes used for both DirecTV and Dish Network are compiant with the FCC criteria (1 meter diameter or smaller).
    2. Even an 18 inch round dish will receive some HD broadcasts, therefore if they are allowing no HD dishes, they are in fact allowing no dishes at all.
    3. The precedent for dishe mounting location is already established.
    4. If they don't want to listen to items 1, 2, and 3 above, you will seek legal counsel to assist with the issue.

    Hopefully by the time you present argument 4 they will relent.

    Carl
     
  2. HDTVsportsfan

    HDTVsportsfan New Member

    5,746
    0
    Nov 29, 2005
    If you can put a dish within a balcony that is a part of your rental property, it's my understanding they cannot make you move it. That is not considered common area. Especially if it's not overhanging or in clear view.

    Do you have any pictures to post?

    It sounds like you have a case no matter which you go.
     
  3. bakers12

    bakers12 ΔS > 0

    1,973
    27
    May 29, 2007
    Chicago -...
    I understand what you're saying. If I could mount a dish on the eave instead of a floor mount, I would do it. What I'm saying is the HOA can regulate the use of their roof. They can not regulate the use of your patio.

    Tell the HOA to make a choice. It's either going on the eave or on the patio. Period.
     
  4. snipes007

    snipes007 Mentor

    44
    0
    Jan 28, 2007
    Pictures attached. The size difference is made more obvious due to the single LNB dish right next to mine.
     

    Attached Files:

  5. HDTVsportsfan

    HDTVsportsfan New Member

    5,746
    0
    Nov 29, 2005
    I still don't think they can pick and choose which dishes they allow, since they have already allowed the common area to be used and it meeets FCC compliance. But, what do i know..i'm not a lawyer.

    The pic on the left, balconies? If so, those are tiny.
     
  6. snipes007

    snipes007 Mentor

    44
    0
    Jan 28, 2007
    No balcony, more like a fake metal design outside the window. No floor there. I wouldn't even dream of mounting it there, that would be a bigger eyesore than they claim it is now.
     
  7. HDTVsportsfan

    HDTVsportsfan New Member

    5,746
    0
    Nov 29, 2005
    I didn't think so.... but you had mentioned earlier a neighbor w/ balcony...i thought maybe ou were trying to show that was supposed to be it.
    Yea...way to small...ugly and not safe...to much overhang would occur.
     
  8. joe diamond

    joe diamond Hall Of Fame

    3,071
    0
    Feb 28, 2007
    Ya know,
    A building of that size could live with a single dish or two on the roof.....Run sat lines to multiswitches in the same cable room I just know the cable company already uses. Disconnect the cable feed and connect to the sat line...........it is technically tougher than that (MDU INSTALLATION) but not as bad as dozens of dishes all over the place.

    A thought,

    Joe
     
  9. d max82

    d max82 Godfather

    306
    0
    May 23, 2007
    Isn't that a slimline two dishes down in that picture? Its definately a 3 lnb if nothing else.
     
  10. PoitNarf

    PoitNarf New Member

    4,880
    0
    Aug 19, 2006
    It's a 3LNB.
     
  11. snipes007

    snipes007 Mentor

    44
    0
    Jan 28, 2007
    Well my first conversation with the Management Company went no where. Luckily there is a Board of Director's meeting tomorrow where I am planning on turning in the following letter. What do you guys think?

    August 7, 2007

    To The Board of Directors of (omitted)

    On Friday, August 3rd, 2007, I received a violation letter regarding the use of an “unapproved satellite dish”. The letter mentioned no details other than the demand that the satellite dish be taken down immediately. After seeking legal consul, I have several concerns about the legitimacy of this request

    The satellite dish in question was installed in August of 2004, a week after I first purchased my unit. I consulted the management company at the time (omitted) and was informed that my current dish was acceptable. I was given a copy of the rules for installation by a person named (omitted), (or (omitted)). The request was approved but no paperwork was given to me. They stated the security guard would be informed to allow the installation to take place. I initially wanted to mount the dish in my patio area but was informed that this violates community rules and regulations. I was informed that all satellite dishes must be installed in a common area, at the eave of the roof above each unit. I agreed to follow these rules and paid for installation of the above mentioned satellite dish. Because of the placement of the satellite dish, cables had to be run into the attic and an additional charge (approx $250) was levied by the satellite company for the installation.

    All was well for three years, as not a single complaint was made, nor violation given. Not one person approached me about the installation nor has anyone deemed it an “eyesore”. Now I am being told that my satellite dish is “not approved”. What was okay three years ago, is not okay today. Upon conversations with several residents concerning this matter, I come to find out that “HD Satellites” (which an extremely vague term) are not allowed by the community. Although you have rights to control what is allowed in a common area, the practice of restricting the satellite dishes to that certain area is illegal.

    I have enclosed the FCC Regulation entitled “Over-the-Air Reception Devices Rule” or “OTARD” which specifically prohibits any state, local, municipal or home owner’s association to restrict the installation and use of a satellite dish, one meter or less in diameter, in any exclusive-use area. Although I am aware that this rule does not apply to the roof eave, the association’s rules and guidelines, forcing installation of satellite dishes on the roof eave directly defies this law. Lying to tenants and informing them that patio installations are not allowed is not only deceitful, but illegal.

    What I would like the board to consider are the following items.

    1 – I would like the Board to review the attached Federal Regulation and amend its current rules and regulations to comply with federal guidelines. This will include giving residents the option to install satellite equipment in exclusive-use areas.

    2 – If residents choose the option to install satellite equipment in the common area like the roof-eave, the association must give specific guidelines on what is allowed. Understand that any installation will incur a cost to the resident, and removing and reinstalling equipment is wasteful and not in anyone’s best interest. Restricting “HD Dishes” is not acceptable language, especially since every satellite dish provided by DirecTV and Dish Network is physically capable of receiving an HD signal. Technically speaking, the community’s current guidelines would deem every satellite dish installed, as an unapproved satellite. I recommend restrictions be based solely on the satellite’s size or model.

    3-Lastly, for existing residents who have been lied to about what is and what is not approved, and for those who have been unlawfully deceived and told that exclusive-use installations are prohibited, a choice should be made.

    -If the Board decides that these dishes are an “eyesore” and not allowed in common areas, the Board should allow the tenant to move the installation to any exclusive-use area and reimburse expenses involved in doing so. This should cover the cost of removal, reinstallation, patching of holes made to eave of roof and relocation of any cabling involved with the installation. It is only fair that the residents not be stuck with these fees because of the negligence of Board or Management Company who failed to comply with federal laws.

    -Or, the Board can decide to allow, or grandfather, any existing installations on the roof eave, and deem them as an “approved satellite”.

    I certainly feel that my requests are reasonable. I understand it is the Board’s main duty to create a positive environment where we can all live happily in homes that are well maintained and retain a high property value. I am willing to work with the Board and come to a compromise on this issue. I do not wish to see this issue debated any further than it has to, but I will not compromise my current rights nor be stuck with fees because of a mistake made by the Association. HD Satellite restrictions are not in anyone’s best interest, especially given the trend of higher quality services. Let’s embrace the future and allow premium services for our premium homes.

    Thank You,
     
  12. RobertE

    RobertE New Member

    8,024
    0
    Jun 9, 2006
    I would drop the bolded line in your #2. Reason being, to me it gives them too much power in saying what is or isn't allowed.

     
  13. HDTVsportsfan

    HDTVsportsfan New Member

    5,746
    0
    Nov 29, 2005
    I'm on your side as i suggest this. I don't know what the current atmosphere w/ this current Board is. Or who has said what to whom and whatever. However, unless your legal counsel has said it's not a problem, you may want to remove the words lies, liar, and deceitful. It sounds a little confrontational. I know you want to play hardball, but this may immediatley make a bad situation worse.

    Just my .02 I'm not a lawyer... just an opinion.
     
  14. snipes007

    snipes007 Mentor

    44
    0
    Jan 28, 2007
    I do need to play hardball. My conversation today showed me they have no interest in hearing me out.
     
  15. HDTVsportsfan

    HDTVsportsfan New Member

    5,746
    0
    Nov 29, 2005
    I understand. Just throwing things out to be considered.

    I would just have a new dish installed on your patio then. Do you hve ny idea how much that might cost.
     
  16. snipes007

    snipes007 Mentor

    44
    0
    Jan 28, 2007
    Shouldnt be much, but Im trying to avoid the cost of doing so. Running the cables inside the house will be a pain. The current entry point is in the attic and all runs start there. Moving the dish downstairs will complicate things.
     
  17. bonscott87

    bonscott87 Cutting Edge: ECHELON '07

    9,809
    2
    Jan 21, 2003
    Nice letter. Go get 'em.
     
  18. PoitNarf

    PoitNarf New Member

    4,880
    0
    Aug 19, 2006
    The entire DBSTalk community supports you in your efforts. Don't let them get away with dish discrimination!
     
  19. snipes007

    snipes007 Mentor

    44
    0
    Jan 28, 2007
    Thank you all for your help. This discussion has helped me better understand what is and what is not allowed. Im sure numerous people have gone through this battle before and I intend on joining in their efforts.

    I will update this thread based on the meeting tomorrow where I intend to read and turn in the above letter along with the FCC ruling.

    Thanks all!
     
  20. PoitNarf

    PoitNarf New Member

    4,880
    0
    Aug 19, 2006
    Maybe some of the board members will change their mind in September when D* starts carrying HD channels that aren't available on their current cable provider :lol:

    Also, it might not hurt to go knock on some of your neighbors doors that have visible dishes and ask them to sign a letter or petition of some sort supporting your position.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page