dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
share rss forum feed

medbuyer

join:2003-11-20
kudos:4
reply to BronsCon

Re: [Rant] Leaving Comcast..... if they'll let me go...

said by BronsCon:

10. Section 16(d) of the Cable Television Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992
(the "1992 Cable Act"), codified at Section 624(i) of the Communications Act, requires the Commission
to "prescribe rules concerning the disposition, after a subscriber terminates service, of any cable installed
by the cable operator within the premises of such subscriber." In February 1993, the Commission issued
a Report and Order implementing Section 624(i) (the "Cable Wiring Order"). The Cable Wiring Order
provided that when a subscriber voluntarily terminates cable service, the operator is required, if it proposes
to remove the wiring, to inform the subscriber: (1) that he or she may purchase the wire; and (2) what
the cost per-foot charge is. If the subscriber declined to purchase the home wiring, the operator was
required to remove it within 30 days or make no subsequent attempt to remove it or to restrict its use.
These rules were designed to advance Section 624(i)'s goals of avoiding the disruption of having the
wiring removed and permitting subscribers to use the wiring with an alternative video service provider.
-----

Is there something newer available that I'm not seeing? That seems to imply that if it's installed by the cable co, it's owned by the cable co unless the resident buys it.

in your case, the landlord must have bought it by then. specially since it's an apartment and tearing it out would cost money...and as you said, it's RG59....that cable must have been there and bought a long time already.

Comcast must be crazy to pull all that cable if your landlord didn't pay for it. Not to mention, cable is dirt cheap in install costs, specially in bulk. It makes more sense to just leave it there too.


BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA

An 8 foot section of a 120 foot run was RG59. The rest was RG6.


medbuyer

join:2003-11-20
kudos:4

said by BronsCon:

An 8 foot section of a 120 foot run was RG59. The rest was RG6.

was that 8' section buried or inaccessible?


BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET

In conduit, as I stated, with the outside end screwed to a ground plane in the locked box with the tap. The tap ports are connected to the individual lines through the ground plane with pigtails to provide service. I'm sure someone's ripped the cover off it again by now so I can probably post photos of what I'm talking about (the reason I was unable to pull the cable myself to inspect it) tonight when I get home.

Or you could just take my word.

Either way, it's Comcast's cable and pulling it to inspect it would have been illegal, as would have been unscrewing it from the ground plane (the box was wide open).


medbuyer

join:2003-11-20
kudos:4

said by BronsCon:

In conduit, as I stated, with the outside end screwed to a ground plane in the locked box with the tap. The tap ports are connected to the individual lines through the ground plane with pigtails to provide service. I'm sure someone's ripped the cover off it again by now so I can probably post photos of what I'm talking about (the reason I was unable to pull the cable myself to inspect it) tonight when I get home.

Or you could just take my word.

Either way, it's Comcast's cable and pulling it to inspect it would have been illegal, as would have been unscrewing it from the ground plane (the box was wide open).

I doubt if this caused your connectivity issuce unless, the rg59 wires is REALLY messed up, this could be the least of your connection problems...

pictures would be justify what you're talking about though...


BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET

Did you read up where I said there were 3 splices in that wire within 12in of each other?

At any rate, replacing the run did fix the problem. The gripe is that I was billed for it when Comcast legally owns and is responsible for the wire. Doesn't matter at this point, it's done and paid for, I didn't feel like arguing with them about it, so it's really a moot point.



BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA
reply to medbuyer

Nope, they must have been out here working on someone's line today because the box is closed. I'll look for a picture online of something similar, it's a pretty standard enclosure, if a bit old, so I should be able to find one.



BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET

Not the exact same one, but: »www.six-ug.com/images/jobs/coax11.jpg

Lines running to each unit connect to the bottom of the ground plane that sticks out a few inches below the taps. Short pigtails connect between the tap and the top of the ground plane. This ensures that all cables are grounded at a known location and that even a non-serviced drop can't accidentally be pulled through the conduit, since only the pigtail is disconnected.

EDIT: typo... sorry about all the edits in this thread lol


medbuyer

join:2003-11-20
kudos:4

said by BronsCon:

Not the exact same one, but: »www.six-ug.com/images/jobs/coax11.jpg

Lines running to each unit connect to the bottom of the ground plane that sticks out a few inches below the taps. Short pigtails connect between the tap and the top of the ground plane. This ensures that all cables are grounded at a known location and that even a non-serviced drop can't accidentally be pulled through the conduit, since only the pigtail is disconnected.

EDIT: typo... sorry about all the edits in this thread lol

see, with that similar unit, I think Comcast owns the lines from the outside up until where they connect to that box.

I don't think in now way Comcast would own the wires going from that box up to your unit.

If they do, as what you are claiming. It is apparent that your apt. landlord is trying to cut costs so as they don't incur costs to maintain it. Letting the providers do that is like asking for trouble.

anyway, you not getting the credit is something that should have been ironed out early on. I am sure that there was some miscommunication between your initial install and the subsequent tech visits coupled with clueless CSR people...


BronsCon

join:2003-10-24
Walnut Creek, CA
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET

Actually, the reason it was done that way is that the apartment manager wanted phone through AT&T, TV through Comcast, and internet through Astound.

Having separate phone and cable providers is trivial, as they each already have their own wiring, since the wiring is different for both. Having service from two cable providers requires that each provider have their own cables installed.

For Astound, it was a no-brainer because it meant their jacks (they use a single plate with phone+coax) would already be installed in every unit; more sales, since people realize immediately (when the manager tells them, and she does) that there is an alternate provider available.

For Comcast, it was an easy choice, as it meant they didn't have to trust the quality of Astound's installed cables.

For AT&T, with U-Verse coming to market, it meant they could sell the service in the building without worries of being kneecapped by old wiring.

I should probably, at this point, mention that there are 4 buildings, a total of 140 units, with adjacent condominiums on either side which are also owned by the same management company (though I'm not sure if such an agreement applies to them; I'm not sure how it would). Maybe not a huge amount of potential business for any one provider, but enough that AT&T installed 2 remotes on the property to service us all with higher speeds than would have been available from the CO.