dslreports logo
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc
view:
topics flat nest 
Comments on news posted 2013-01-04 10:04:21: Verizon has promised to wire all of New York City with FiOS by 2014, but now says they're running into resistance from landlords, some of whom tell the telco their tenants don't want FiOS. ..

prev · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · next

DynoMutt
@verizon.net

DynoMutt to PhoenixDown

Anon

to PhoenixDown

Re: DSL/POTS is not owned by Verizon alone

Then install the fiber lines in parallel and leave the POTS lines intact instead of using them as a drag.

Verizon becomes yet another cable company for the fiber lines and continues to act as ILEC for the POTS lines.

It is not up to Verizon to decide to rip out POTS lines, they don't have the authority or the ownership.
Chubbysumo
join:2009-12-01
Duluth, MN
Ubee E31U2V1
(Software) pfSense
Netgear WNR3500L

Chubbysumo to elray

Member

to elray

Re: Cut them off

said by elray:

To this day, tenants will have satellite dishes installed without consultation, then act shocked and dismayed when they are given notice to remove the un-permitted devices and wiring and fix the damage they caused - or face eviction.

Here where I live, and in both MN and WI, there are state laws about a tennants right to access any services that are available in the area. I can legally force my hand if I want, but have never had to. I feel bad for all those states that do not have these tennant protection laws, because it usually results in some ugly court battles, and for that matter, a tennants services being useless.
In the last building I rented at, there was only DSL services when I moved in, and the landlord didnt want a rats nest(as you say, they are quite ugly, and can be prevented with asking nicely to the installer). She legally had to agree to get charter installed regardless, but was there to supervise the initial install to make sure they put their split box next to centurylinks, and to make sure they ran all 8 units so that there was a single cable into each, and that there was not excessive wiring outside. The installers were nice enough to go along with it, and you could not tell the wires were even there.
Honestly, I support these kinds of laws in every state, because you should not be forced into some shitty service provider who knows you have no other choice(in their system, they can see who has a choice of services, you think they don't keep track?), and can basically tell you your SOL on issues, and can continually jack up your service rates comparative to those around you.

wmcbrine
join:2002-12-30
Laurel, MD

wmcbrine to linicx

Member

to linicx

Re: My experience

said by linicx:

My experience with FIOS, Telco, and copper to the home is not very pretty. You may have a zillion Mbps down, but if you don't have 1.5-2 Mbps

That doesn't sound like you're talking about Fios at all. Hmm...

Nearly every phone and cable company in America has jumped on FIOS with the same miserable results.

Ah, I see -- you're confusing the term "Fios" for "VoIP". No, "VoIP" stands for "Voice over IP" (Internet). "Fios" is Verizon's brand name for their fiber optic service, which can serve as a medium for telephone, TV, and Internet. It is in no way interchangeable with the term "VoIP".

Fios Internet is not only one of the fastest consumer Internet services available in the U.S., it's also one of the most symmetric. 2 Mbps up (and 5 down) was the lowest tier they ever offered (apart from some DSL replacement plans). Plans today start at 5 Mbps up, IIRC (and 15 down). Mine is 35 up and down.

Fios Phone comes, nowadays, in two forms -- POTS over fiber, and Fios Digital Voice, which is a VoIP offering. POTS over fiber is indistinguishable from POTS over copper, except that it's powered locally instead of at the central office -- and it sounds better. It uses a dedicated channel, which like POTS is only 64 Kbps. FDV apparently uses much of the same system, and people who have it seem to feel that it provides the same quality as POTS. I couldn't say.

Pure VoIP doesn't need anything like 2 Mbps up, either (see above), though you might have other issues with low-quality, highly-asymmetric networks, due to latency or whatever.
Chubbysumo
join:2009-12-01
Duluth, MN
Ubee E31U2V1
(Software) pfSense
Netgear WNR3500L

1 recommendation

Chubbysumo to elray

Member

to elray

Re: Cut them off

HOAs are getting sued and becoming optional. If I ever went to buy a house and it had one of those mandatory HOA bullshit fees, I would either tell them to get me out of it, or I'm not buying(or maybe come back later legally). I want my bills in my name, and I will maintain my own property. I refuse to buy into the HOA crap, because you don't know what they do with your money(other than pay the manager of the HOA an exorbitant amount to do almost nothing). My bills, my name, my services, and I will do whatever the fuck I want with my house(because I paid for it to be able to do that). HOAs are going out of style, and are starting to get shut down across america because of theft and illegal things happening.
Chubbysumo

Chubbysumo to battleop

Member

to battleop

Re: This is common..

said by battleop:

We ran into a similar problem with buildings that are owned/managed by CB Richard Ellis. They pretty much only allow their exclusive carriers in the building and deny any orders that do not in the tenants name. So if they have an exclusive with Verizon and ABC Clec orders a Verizon circuit in their name they will reject the order.

In many states, this is illegal. I think in NY, its illegal because NY has tennant protections on right to access services. Tho, it may not be worth your lease, but it could get you out of your lease, or better yet, you could get your landlords to pay your rent for the rest of your lease after you take them to court over it(if your willing to do so). Either way, talk to a lawyer first.
UnnDunn
Premium Member
join:2005-12-21
Brooklyn, NY

UnnDunn to David

Premium Member

to David

Re: Cut them off

You have the right to mount a dish anywhere you have exclusive use. So if you have exclusive use of the patio, you can mount it there and your landlord can't do anything about it...

Or at least, that's how it's supposed to work. Of course, in the real world, your landlord can make your life very, very miserable and make it prohibitively difficult for you to get legal redress.
UnnDunn

UnnDunn to MxxCon

Premium Member

to MxxCon

Re: Verizon LIARS!

I'm guessing either your building management or VZ wanted to use the existing inside coax runs to distribute FiOS to each apartment, instead of ripping out the copper and running new fiber to each apartment.
UnnDunn

UnnDunn to tmc8080

Premium Member

to tmc8080

Re: Cherry picking..

This is not true. I know several NYCHA buildings in NYC that have FiOS. And VZ's franchise agreement with the city has stipulations prohibiting cherry-picking. Specifically, the median income of FiOS household residents cannot exceed the median income of all NYC residents.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

CXM_Splicer to IowaCowboy

Premium Member

to IowaCowboy

Re: State law

The problem with that is Verizon already has a presence in the building. The building owners would not (and could not) stop Verizon from fixing the copper. They are well within their rights though to disallow VZ from wiring the building with a whole new service.

battleop
join:2005-09-28
00000

battleop to Chubbysumo

Member

to Chubbysumo

Re: This is common..

In our case the building is commercial so these laws do not apply.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

CXM_Splicer to TBBroadband

Premium Member

to TBBroadband

Re: Say whaaaa

It has nothing to do with unions or colocation... the building owners can be convinced (paid) to sign exclusivity contracts which disallow other services from coming in for a certain period of time.
CXM_Splicer

CXM_Splicer to wmcbrine

Premium Member

to wmcbrine

Re: My experience

It is my understanding (both as an employee and from reading this board) that POTS over fiber is no longer offered. The only people who have it are grandfathered in until they make an account change.

PhoenixDown
FIOS is Awesome
Premium Member
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY

PhoenixDown to DynoMutt

Premium Member

to DynoMutt

Re: DSL/POTS is not owned by Verizon alone

Verizon is doing that ... they aren't ripping out anyone POTS service but if that POTs service breaks, and suitable copper facilities are not available to replace it, then they will be moved to fiber. End of Story.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

CXM_Splicer to MxxCon

Premium Member

to MxxCon

Re: Verizon LIARS!

That doesn't sound accurate since we are wiring up buildings all the time that already have cable (and it isn't coming out). They would not legally be allowed to force people to rip out their cable. More than likely, your building management already signed an exclusivity deal with Cablevision.

PhoenixDown
FIOS is Awesome
Premium Member
join:2003-06-08
Fresh Meadows, NY

PhoenixDown to pyziur

Premium Member

to pyziur

Re: Copper vs FIOS

said by pyziur :

In blacked-out areas after Hurricane Sandy, most FIOS systems stopped working (the batteries don't have more than a four-hour charge when power fails). POTS/copper systems run on company-provided current; therefore, if the phone company has current, then the line to the premises has current.

fyi

There is at least one building downtown that was flooded and TWC, RCN and VZ copper facilities were ruined because of the flooding. The tenants on FIOS stayed up and were the first to have service restored once the power came back. That was months ago. The other tenants are still waiting on TWC and RCN for service.

IowaCowboy
Lost in the Supermarket
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA

IowaCowboy to CXM_Splicer

Premium Member

to CXM_Splicer

Re: State law

In Massachusetts, they must allow Verizon access to the building under state law if one or more tenants requests cable. And since FiOS has a TV service and they have a franchising agreement with the city/town, they meet the definition of cable provider under state law. What they cannot do is force their way into apartments where the tenants have not requested service. And they cannot force a landlord to pay for the install so the tenants can be forced to pay for the install. This is Massachusetts law so New York law may be different but the general consensus is that landlords cannot refuse access but individual tenants can (unless the landlord wants the unit wired for future tenants). I do support Verizon forcing FiOS upgrades as technology comes and goes and the POTS/DSL system has reached the end of its useful life. Sunsets can be a good thing as it forces out old tech to allow for new tech. It's done all the time with wireless and broadband as old technology can hold new tech hostage (such as occupying spectrum or hogging system capacity). Look at cable switching off analog, an analog SD channel can use the same system resources as several HD digital channels or prevent faster Internet speeds. Time Warner of Maine just released DOCSIS 3.0, they've had switched digital video for a while now, and they are getting around to shutting off analog SD channels (I just put a DTA on the TV that grandma's husband uses since he has dementia and teaching him how to use a full featured set top box would be impossible). Getting rid of analog along with switched digital video will reclaim tons of bandwidth and that will allow for new services now and it will have the capacity for future services/devices in the future. When I first got broadband back in 2001, analog channels consumed most of a cable system's capacity and Mediacom (when I lived in Iowa) capped speeds at 1.5 Mbps down/128 Kbps up because they did not have the system resources (mostly consumed by analog and there were no HD channels at the time) or technology to support higher speeds. Comcast has shut off analog, deployed newer tech (D3) and now they have speeds up to 105/20 and plenty of HD. They launched tons of HD channels around the time they shut down analog.

FiosDeprived

Anon

TF Cornerstone has been doing this for years!

TFCornerstone has been approached by Verizon many, many times and they constantly refuse Verizon access to the building for FIOS services.

Their brand new new buildings in LIC (LESS THAN ONE YEAR OLD!) don't have FIOS even though the entire area is wired up and ready to go. In fact, to my knowledge, not a single TFCornerstone building has FIOS in the entire city!

I would have left this year if TWC and RCN hadn't turned on DOCSIS 3.0 so that I can get a somewhat reasonable speed, but they still can't compare to FIOS's upstream and that's what I really need...

Seems like someone isn't getting paid enough under the table to let them in. This should be illegal!!!

miataman
I've attained a PHD in DVR.
Premium Member
join:2010-10-27
Chelmsford, MA

miataman to skeechan

Premium Member

to skeechan

Re: Cut them off

said by skeechan:

When the customers call in (from their cells [the majority of which are VZ Wireless]) point them to the building manager's office number.


Subaru
1-3-2-4
Premium Member
join:2001-05-31
Greenwich, CT

Subaru to rradina

Premium Member

to rradina

Re: "Most of them prefer the reliability of POTS"

I would say most have a large bank of batteries as well.
rody_44
Premium Member
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA

rody_44 to FiosDeprived

Premium Member

to FiosDeprived

Re: TF Cornerstone has been doing this for years!

Lol Dont you think if the building is less than a year old maybe thats when verizon should have went in. Just plain stupid for verizon to have waited until after the building was complete.

Pirate515
Premium Member
join:2001-01-22
Brooklyn, NY

Pirate515 to rradina

Premium Member

to rradina

Re: Cut them off

Last time I checked, NYC laws regarding this kind of thing were vague. AFAIK, if tenant moves out earlier, landlord can still keep charging them rent for the rest of their lease term. At the same time, there is a provision that says that landlord must make reasonable effort to find new tenant. However, it doesn't define what "reasonable" is. So if let's say 6 months have passed, tenant is pissed as landlord keeps charging him rent yet it seems like he hasn't lifted a finger to try to find a new tenant. Yet the landlord turns around and says that a bunch of people have seen the apartment but not too many were interested; then out of the ones that were, one has a criminal record, another one has no job and poor credit and third one is a registered sex offender; needless to say he doesn't want any of these as his next tenant. At best, looks like it's probably left to judge to define what "reasonable" is on a case by case basis.

There is, however, a provision against double-dipping. Once landlord finds a new tenant, the old tenant is off the hook and doesn't owe any more rent.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

CXM_Splicer to IowaCowboy

Premium Member

to IowaCowboy

Re: State law

Here in NY I have heard of apartment owners that offer cable and Internet to their tenants for a fee and don't allow cable/FIOS/satellite in the building at all so I think the laws between the two states are significantly different.

Of course new technology will always come in and phase out the older stuff but there are ways to do it properly and most companies don't. Verizon prematurely killing copper is one example. Another example is the cable upgrade in our area. As the analog channels were moved to digital, people with analog only obviously lost channels. With that, there should have been a corresponding reduction of their bill, that didn't happen. If they wanted to continue receiving the channels they were already paying for, they were now forced to rent a cable box which increased their bill. Upgrading service is understandable and necessary; deliberately reducing quality of service to people (who you already agreed to provide service for) just to now force them off of that service is just wrong. It is very much like a customer 'cancelling' their service by just not paying the bill anymore but using the service until the company comes out and disconnects them.

IowaCowboy
Lost in the Supermarket
Premium Member
join:2010-10-16
Springfield, MA

IowaCowboy

Premium Member

Like Karl said it the article that state law says that landlords cannot interfere with the installation of services and the landlords are trying to extort the telco. If I was in a complex that would not let me get FiOS, the landlord would find him/herself in housing court real fast. And it is well known here in Western Mass that the housing courts are rigged in favor of the tenants because evicting tenants here is like pulling teeth. The tenants have all of these resources like legal aid and other community resources. It is well known here to be careful who you rent to because you don't want to have to go through the eviction process. But when you are trying to rent out a rat infested unit full of mold along carpet that a cat used as its litter box, then you are going to get the low end of tenants.

Some apartments are so bad that the housing courts have sentenced the landlord to live in one of his units.

Eddy120876
join:2009-02-16
Bronx, NY

Eddy120876

Member

hey is the Landlord. If they could rape you they would

I been dealing with my landlord and his management corp funnies. That block DirecTV and Dish Network from providing us one sat for each building and just use the same cables but they say no. Well he they lied to me so many times and they lied to Dish and DirecTV rep saying he never called when the guy was on the other line of a 3way call.

MxxCon
join:1999-11-19
Brooklyn, NY

MxxCon to CXM_Splicer

Member

to CXM_Splicer

Re: Verizon LIARS!

I never said that VZ wanted to rip out any cables.
They just didn't want our management to allow CV to continue offering their services.
CV used to have exclusive in our buildings up until 2 years ago.
CXM_Splicer
Looking at the bigger picture
Premium Member
join:2011-08-11
NYC

CXM_Splicer

Premium Member

Sorry, by 'kick Cablevision out' I thought you meant make all the tenants switch. But my main point is that we are wiring buildings every day without exclusive rights so I don't know why your landlord's buildings would be different. I suspect there is more to the story than your landlord is telling you, but hey, maybe this is a new thing VZ is trying to do... who knows. I certainly wouldn't put them above extortion.
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

tmc8080 to UnnDunn

Member

to UnnDunn

Re: Cherry picking..

said by UnnDunn:

This is not true. I know several NYCHA buildings in NYC that have FiOS. And VZ's franchise agreement with the city has stipulations prohibiting cherry-picking. Specifically, the median income of FiOS household residents cannot exceed the median income of all NYC residents.

How many NYCHA residents can afford single/dual/triple play services? You can't pay for FIOS with vouchers...
Anyway I'm talking about NEW builds (most of 2011, 2012 and ongoing).. not existing builds prior to 2009-- primarily overlooking the run-down areas of Brooklyn and Manhattan vs the premium elevator & doorman buildings. NYC has agreements and stipulations to many things (telecom or non-telecom).. the reality in NYC is often something quite different (usually correlated with income/socioeconomic disparity)
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO

rradina to Pirate515

Member

to Pirate515

Re: Cut them off

In that case, it's probably best to make due with whatever telephone service is available (perhaps switch to cable phone if it has been restored and Verizon is still unable to work out a deal to do what they want to do). If that's unsatisfactory when the end of the rental agreement is reached, move.

However, I've read that NYC has high demand for good apartments -- especially, I would think, in the areas where copper was ruined by flooding. It might be more important to keep the apartment you have than regaining the telephone service that you once enjoyed.

Pathfinder5
Dazed Confused
Premium Member
join:2000-03-26
New York, NY

Pathfinder5 to MxxCon

Premium Member

to MxxCon

Re: Verizon LIARS!

I find that very hard to believe. I have never seen Vz ask for exclusive rights and I have been in well over 100 apartment buildings inspecting FIOS installations. Vz just finished (December) wiring my complex. They ran Fiber into each apartment in the same closet that the Time Warner cables are.
Pathfinder5

Pathfinder5 to tmc8080

Premium Member

to tmc8080

Re: Cherry picking..

said by tmc8080:

How many NYCHA residents can afford single/dual/triple play services? You can't pay for FIOS with vouchers...
Anyway I'm talking about NEW builds (most of 2011, 2012 and ongoing).. not existing builds prior to 2009-- primarily overlooking the run-down areas of Brooklyn and Manhattan vs the premium elevator & doorman buildings. NYC has agreements and stipulations to many things (telecom or non-telecom).. the reality in NYC is often something quite different (usually correlated with income/socioeconomic disparity)

As many as can afford TWC or Cablevision triple plays. I don't know what your experiences are but I have seen plenty in projects in NYC, Yonkers, Mt Vernon and New Rochelle.
prev · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · next