My leases prohibit installation of satellite dishes. While at my building today, I noticed two tenants put them up and I'll be requiring that they remove them. In my rooming house I provide wifi and let them subscribe to whatever service they want. I'm thinking of doing the same in my buildings as I'm not crazy about the cable folks running around either. They should check with LLs before putting these dishes up. They never come back out to take them down. It's like they trying to stake a claim on service using my building.

Please feel free to critique or comment.

What Steve said. You have to word things properly. You said "My leases prohibit installation of satellite dishes." -- if it really is that simple (i.e. you just have a clause saying the satellite dishes are not allowed -- period), then you are violating federal law.

You CAN limit them from placing them on your roof on the idea that this is considered damage no matter how good the installer is.

You CAN limit them only to areas that they have "exclusive control" over.

But, for example, if you have a balcony and they want to put a satellite dish on the ledge using sandbags or whatever (i.e. without drilling into your building/railing), then they can do it -- and a lease clause prohibiting it would not be legal.

- John...

G,

My lease is clear: Satellite equipment may not be attached to the roof or building in any fashion. It must be on a post in the yard. $200 fine to remove imporoperly installed equipment, wires, and holes.

My residents see an existing dish as a beneficial amenity. Our local providers leave the dish in place fro the next person, just swap out the control box.

Dish marketers are aggressive - in WalMart every day and Sam's Club, on pizza boxes, in every Menards bag, etc.

Did you review your rule at Lease Orientation?

"Our local providers leave the dish in place fro the next person, just swap out the control box"

In my opinion, it's not BS. This was a NEEDED thing years ago -- and still is today. Way too many cable companies still have a monopoly in most areas. There is absolutely no competition for TV service. Sure, internet has finally started to change that -- but there is still a big difference between Netflix and cable/dish service. If you want to get your local network stations for local news and such, then you still need something other than internet access in most areas.

So, until cable companies lose their monopolies in more areas, I fully support this sort of law. It prevents HOAs from putting "no dish" restrictions into their bylaws. It is needed.

Sure, the dish companies lobbied for it -- but you know who lobbied AGAINST it as hard as they could? Cable companies. And I'm not trying to support them.

- John...

I'm no longer a huge TV watcher, however, I have Direct TV streaming that works with my internet service here at home and I see no difference between it and satellite or cable. Cable is far less intrusive than satellite and yet there's still drilling.

They're going to get cable/satellite one way or another and the cable guy is going to install it however he wants to. Just make it easier to do things YOUR way.

1. Install a pole on the satellite friendly side of the house. Plant it in cement and bracket it to soffit face. Make sure the cable TV demarc is close by.

2. Run ALL cabling to a splitter mounted under soffit next to pole or a NEMA utility box on pole.

3. Install pole mount brackets to help mount satellite dish. Leave them there.

4. Put sign on pole stating any dish mounted on roof and not this pole will be removed.

The lazy installer will want the dish next to where all cables meet. Pole easier than roof mount if you leave the correct hardware attached.

Glad you posted this. Yikes! I wasn’t aware of the law saying I cannot prohibit satellite dishes.

The drain cleaning guy I use mentioned he used to work for a cable installer before doing drains. Great kid, told me how to cut in a clean-out on my stack, even came over early and checked my work.

So, I plan on having him come over at any turnovers, help me locate a post in the yard, run the wire into the house, and outlets (is that the proper term?) to each room.

It drives me bonkers to see twenty-seven different cables all running over the sides of the houses, three boxes in the back, and a rats’ nest of cables in the basement. I ask my tenant to please let me know when the internet/tv persons are going to be installing, and I tell them it’s because I want the extra cables cleared up, want things neat and tidy. (And, don’t know enough about it myself.) But, they forget, or, don’t want to bother me early in the relationship. (Trust not yet established)

Even had to argue a bit with one cable guy, he wasn’t going to clean up the old wires (I suppose, NOT his job, not his company’s equipment,) and was going to run more wires outside the house. Exasperated, I finally said, ‘ look, this is my tenants’ home. When they pull in the ally after work, I want them to see a nice house, that looks peaceful, relaxing. That jumble of extra wires and boxes is not relaxing. You probably wouldn't see that on a house out in the suburbs’ He finally got it, took the two minutes extra to install things very neatly, extra wires, extra boxes gone.

I spell out cable and dish in my lease under utilities and other services. At lease signing I make sure I have a conversation with the new tenant about cable installation. The funny thing is tenants today will say , "oh I'm not getting cable" . Then I have to thread the needle and say it's still a cable that will be brought into the property, etc. Dish has declined in popularity. As for cable there is usually a spot where it come in already and I show it to the tenant.

I also ask them when the provider is coming and make sure I or handyman can be there to make sure no new holes are drilled. Spectrum is better these days about getting owner approval before they do anything.

"I would think that if you are trying to have several units share internet that they would bandwidth/ connectivity issues."

I have wifi set up in two places now; my rooming house and my fourplex. I got the connection with the top speed and bandwidth in both instances and there are no complaints. The only thing I had to do in the rooming house was get a range extender. Nine rooms run internet access for TV, gaming and etc without a problem.

I went and pulled the actual law and I have several outs. They have the satellites attached to the roof and the side of the building, which are not considered common areas. This is pretty restrictive in terms of where these can be placed. Also, if I provide a common central antenna (presumably wifi would be considered as a central antenna), then I can prohibit individual antennas. I'm going to research this further, but it looks like my original approach is the way to go; give them very high speed and wide range wifi and remove the satellites.

Q: Does the rule apply to residents of rental property?

A: Yes. Effective January 22, 1999, renters may install antennas within their leasehold, which means inside the dwelling or on outdoor areas that are part of the tenant's leased space and which are under the exclusive use or control of the tenant. Typically, for apartments, these areas include balconies, balcony railings, and terraces. For rented single family homes or manufactured homes which sit on rented property, these areas include the home itself and patios, yards, gardens or other similar areas. If renters do not have access to these outside areas, the tenant may install the antenna inside the rental unit. Renters are not required to obtain the consent of the landlord prior to installing an antenna in these areas. The rule does not apply to common areas, such as the roof or the exterior walls of an apartment building. Generally, balconies or patios that are shared with other people or are accessible from other units are not considered to be exclusive use areas.

Q: Are there restrictions that can be placed on residents of rental property?

A: Yes. A restriction necessary to prevent damage to leased property may be reasonable. For example, tenants could be prohibited from drilling holes through exterior walls or through the roof. However, a restriction designed to prevent ordinary wear and tear (e.g., marks, scratches, and minor damage to carpets, walls and draperies) would likely not be reasonable provided the antenna is installed wholly within the antenna user's own exclusive use area. In addition, rental property is subject to the same protection and exceptions to the rule as owned property. Thus, a landlord may impose other types of restrictions that do not impair installation, maintenance or use under the rule. The landlord may also impose restrictions necessary for safety or historic preservation.

Q: May the association, landlord, building management or property owner restrict the installation of an individual antenna because a central antenna will be available in the future?

A: It is not the intent of the Commission to deter or unreasonably delay the installation of individual antennas because a central antenna may become available. However, persons could be required to remove individual antennas once a central antenna is available if the cost of removal is paid by the landlord or association and the user is reimbursed for the value of the antenna. Further, an individual who wants video programming or fixed wireless services other than what is available through the central antenna should not be unreasonably delayed in obtaining the desired programming or services either through modifications to the central antenna, installation of an additional central antenna, or by using an individual antenna.

Q: I live in a condominium with a balcony, but I cannot receive a signal from the satellite because my balcony faces north. Can I use the roof?

A: No. The roof of a condominium is generally a common area, not an area reserved for an individual's exclusive use. If the roof is a common area, you may not use it unless the condominium association gives you permission. The condominium is not obligated to provide a place for you to install an antenna if you do not have an exclusive use area.

Also "exclusive use" may very well mean something different in the SFH context. In the MFH context, there are many "common areas" thus more opportunities to impose restrictions.

Thank you for having laid out the law that Steve noted. I ran into the same issue with some tenants over a decade ago, and I understand how you feel. Arg, more holes being drilled into a roof or building is future annoyance to address after tenants move.

Indeed, Landlord of the Flies makes a good point about how to have the tenants install a dish, however, as you noted, DirectTV is now the direction that TV progammers now seem to take. I've heard about more and more programs that dropped their service on Dish because it's more cost-effective to use streaming, so you could perhaps pitch that to your tenants. It's usually specialty programs that still are on Dish such as those in certain foreign languages, and they too are abandoning ship.

Anyway, please share what happens. Best of luck.

Any and all dish base systems are removed, when tv company returns to restore service they are required to pole mount or another one Will be in the trash within a months time.

Karl,

I am curious -- does your internet provider know that you are doing this? Most do not allow it (to be split among tenants like that). Although, if it is a rooming house and not individual units, that might be different.

Also -- do you do any sort of monitoring so that you know which tenant is which connection (such as my watching MAC addresses)? If not, what do you plan to do when you start getting copyright infringement claims? Or, even worse, illegal acts like downloading illegal content?

The FBI will show up at your door -- not theirs. :) You better be ready to check the logs and go "Yep, that was John Doe in Room 7; here are the logs to prove it."

- John...

Yes, but there is actually a difference between "open wireless" and private wireless. Those places are offering "open wireless" which most agree falls under the Safe Harbor laws of the DMCA.

You'd be offering private wireless for specific users. That generally changes your Safe Harbor status, in my opinion. You have to have a "repeat offenders" plan in place (i.e. if you get a notice, you need to be able to have something to ban the MAC address of a repeat offender).

Yes, most people just ignore it. But, heck, lots of people drive their cars without insurance too -- and only a few get caught. It all depends on your level of risk and gambling, I guess. :)

In any case, it actually isn't the same thing as Panera Bread's free WiFi according to the law. Seems weird, I agree, but that's how it is. :)

- John...

John, thanks for that perspective.