dslreports logo
 story category
Landlords Find Ways Around Exclusive Broadband Deal Ban
Like charging more for trash & water if you choose a different ISP
In October of 2007 the FCC banned cable operators from striking exclusive broadband contracts with apartment landlords, a decision that survived a legal appeal by the cable industry. In early 2008, the FCC then issued the same ruling so it covered the phone companies. As we noted at the time, the ruling was well intended, but had ample loopholes, and didn't force landlords to provide tenants with access to any ISP they choose. As the Consumerist notes, landlords have found plenty of ways around the rules, like one Houston landlord who charges residents an extra $40 per month for trash and water if they don't go with the complex's chosen provider:
quote:
the FCC says what the complex is doing is legal for now. That's because the complex is not banning other cable companies from providing service to its tenants. But if renters choose to go with another provider, they'll have to pay the $40 to the complex and another cable bill. It's called bulk billing. (The head of the Texas Consumer Complaint Center) calls it a loophole.)
Of course the FCC has their hands rather full with plans for new network neutrality rules and the national broadband plan, so it's likely this loophole isn't going anywhere for now.
view:
topics flat nest 

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

another reason

that I'm buying a house. landlords can be mighty shady.
thevorpal1
join:2007-11-16
Alexandria, VA

thevorpal1

Member

Re: another reason

said by ArrayList:

that I'm buying a house. landlords can be mighty shady.
Right now I'm in a fight with a landlord that 'lost' my notice that I'm not going to re-up a lease with them when this one expires.

RealoRc
Premium Member
join:2003-01-25
Brooklyn, NY

RealoRc

Premium Member

Re: another reason

You sent the notice via certified letter?

Jim Gurd
Premium Member
join:2000-07-08
Livonia, MI

1 recommendation

Jim Gurd to thevorpal1

Premium Member

to thevorpal1
said by thevorpal1:

Right now I'm in a fight with a landlord that 'lost' my notice that I'm not going to re-up a lease with them when this one expires.
Just move out. What are they going to do to you, evict you? Your contract is up.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

patcat88

Member

Re: another reason

said by Jim Gurd:

said by thevorpal1:

Right now I'm in a fight with a landlord that 'lost' my notice that I'm not going to re-up a lease with them when this one expires.
Just move out. What are they going to do to you, evict you? Your contract is up.
Sue you, then collect your assets and garnish your wage.
88615298 (banned)
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness

88615298 (banned)

Member

Re: another reason

said by patcat88:

said by Jim Gurd:

said by thevorpal1:

Right now I'm in a fight with a landlord that 'lost' my notice that I'm not going to re-up a lease with them when this one expires.
Just move out. What are they going to do to you, evict you? Your contract is up.
Sue you, then collect your assets and garnish your wage.
Sue you for what, violating a lease that is EXPIRED? If he did that you end up owning that property after you sue him. I have never heard of a law that requires you to let a landlord know that you are going to re-up a lease or not. Would it be courteous sure, REQUIRED no.
patcat88
join:2002-04-05
Jamaica, NY

-1 recommendation

patcat88

Member

Re: another reason

said by 88615298:

Sue you for what, violating a lease that is EXPIRED? If he did that you end up owning that property after you sue him. I have never heard of a law that requires you to let a landlord know that you are going to re-up a lease or not. Would it be courteous sure, REQUIRED no.
If its in the contract and notwithstanding any law........
ender7074
join:2006-11-21
Saint Louis, MO

1 edit

ender7074 to 88615298

Member

to 88615298
Depends on whats in the lease. I had this fight too. I gave 30 days notice and they claimed I gave them nothing. I ended up in court over this and not even a dated letter that I produced made any difference. The lease said I had to give 90, yes 3 goddamn months, notice before moving out or I owed them a truckload of cash. I did end up paying some but not the asinine amount they wanted. My attorney told me that this place makes as much money on suing previous tennants than they do on rent every month. Its a douchebag operation that puts up a very nice front to get you into decaying apartments.

Camelot One
MVM
join:2001-11-21
Bloomington, IN

Camelot One to 88615298

MVM

to 88615298
said by 88615298:

Sue you for what, violating a lease that is EXPIRED? If he did that you end up owning that property after you sue him. I have never heard of a law that requires you to let a landlord know that you are going to re-up a lease or not. Would it be courteous sure, REQUIRED no.
Most apartment leases these days include an auto-renew clause, which basically says at the end of the lease you will stay, unless you tell them otherwise, for x length of time. Mine have all required 60 days move out notice, even at or beyond the end of the original lease. Failing to provide that 60 day notice allows them to charge you for 60 days, plus keep any deposits.

And nailing people on that one was a BIG money maker for apartments in Austin.
jjeffeory
jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
Bloomington, IN

1 edit

jjeffeory to 88615298

Member

to 88615298
Wisconson has practices that force you to give them 90 days notice before vacating. It's required. Ca, Nevada, La, do NOT. As I said, you really need to know the local rules.

thedragonmas
Premium Member
join:2007-12-28
Albany, GA
Netgear R6300 v2
ARRIS SB6180

thedragonmas

Premium Member

Re: another reason

ive never heard of this.. my lease clearly states it will expire on X date unless i give written notice that i will be renewing it... now should i choose to move while the lease is active i am required to give 30 days notice, the exact date i will be out. and that months rent.
33358088 (banned)
join:2008-09-23

33358088 (banned) to 88615298

Member

to 88615298
said by 88615298:

Sue you for what, violating a lease that is EXPIRED? If he did that you end up owning that property after you sue him. I have never heard of a law that requires you to let a landlord know that you are going to re-up a lease or not. Would it be courteous sure, REQUIRED no.
get a fucking webcam walk over to his door and crazy glue notice to vacate on it
walk away
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9 to Jim Gurd

Premium Member

to Jim Gurd
Typically, the worst that can happen without signing a lease is a 30-day lease which means one more month of rent.

nothing00
join:2001-06-10
Centereach, NY

nothing00

Member

Re: another reason

How about when the lease includes an auto-renewal clause for another specified term, like a year?

morbo
Complete Your Transaction
join:2002-01-22
00000

morbo

Member

Re: another reason

are you a retail business? because auto-renewal for a year term on an apartment or such is so rare that a judge would toss it. add to that there are specific requirements for notifying the tenant that the auto-renewal is pending if no repsonse by x day.

nothing00
join:2001-06-10
Centereach, NY

nothing00

Member

Re: another reason

Must depend where you live. Where I became familiar with this was in Maryland, land of the ridiculous 30 page lease agreements. Anyway, many of them had auto-renewal clauses, most for 1 year or whatever the lease what written for. And there was never any notification requirement. Simply do nothing (both landlord and tenant) and you're both locked in for another year.

DC DSL
There's a reason I'm Command.
Premium Member
join:2000-07-30
Washington, DC
Actiontec GT784WN

DC DSL

Premium Member

Re: another reason

said by nothing00:

Must depend where you live. Where I became familiar with this was in Maryland, land of the ridiculous 30 page lease agreements. Anyway, many of them had auto-renewal clauses, most for 1 year or whatever the lease what written for. And there was never any notification requirement. Simply do nothing (both landlord and tenant) and you're both locked in for another year.
Here in DC, the standard end of lease action in the majority of the larger landlords/apartment buildings is automatic conversion to a month-to-month tenant with a 30-day notification requirement. Few offer actual lease renewals. Terms can differ greatly with smaller landlords and condo rent-outs. Things are this way here because of the huge turnover of people who are here for political or contracting jobs.
moonpuppy (banned)
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD

moonpuppy (banned)

Member

Re: another reason

said by DC DSL:

said by nothing00:

Must depend where you live. Where I became familiar with this was in Maryland, land of the ridiculous 30 page lease agreements. Anyway, many of them had auto-renewal clauses, most for 1 year or whatever the lease what written for. And there was never any notification requirement. Simply do nothing (both landlord and tenant) and you're both locked in for another year.
Here in DC, the standard end of lease action in the majority of the larger landlords/apartment buildings is automatic conversion to a month-to-month tenant with a 30-day notification requirement. Few offer actual lease renewals. Terms can differ greatly with smaller landlords and condo rent-outs. Things are this way here because of the huge turnover of people who are here for political or contracting jobs.
Mine was like that when I lived in an apartment in MD. Your lease ends, you went month to month if you did not sign a new one. They also changed management companies 3 times and the current company has multiple problems with various properties in the area (CO poisoning, high crime rates, etc.) They tried not to give me back my security deposit and it took over a month to get it (in violation of their contract) but I got it eventually.
k1ll3rdr4g0n
join:2005-03-19
Homer Glen, IL

k1ll3rdr4g0n to nothing00

Member

to nothing00
said by nothing00:

Must depend where you live. Where I became familiar with this was in Maryland, land of the ridiculous 30 page lease agreements. Anyway, many of them had auto-renewal clauses, most for 1 year or whatever the lease what written for. And there was never any notification requirement. Simply do nothing (both landlord and tenant) and you're both locked in for another year.
I would have totally have said "Thanks!" sat down in a chair next to him and read every page right next to him. If there was something I didn't like, I would look at him and say "change this otherwise I walk". With a wad of $100 bills in my hands none the less . It would only be his greedy fault for the money to walk.

I feel kind of bad for saps who don't read their agreement, then at the end realize how screwed they are. But, its just like cell phone contracts, if you don't read the fine print, and get boned by a big cell phone then in reality it really is only your fault.
thevorpal1
join:2007-11-16
Alexandria, VA

thevorpal1

Member

Re: another reason

said by k1ll3rdr4g0n:

I would have totally have said "Thanks!" sat down in a chair next to him and read every page right next to him. If there was something I didn't like, I would look at him and say "change this otherwise I walk". With a wad of $100 bills in my hands none the less . It would only be his greedy fault for the money to walk.

I feel kind of bad for saps who don't read their agreement, then at the end realize how screwed they are. But, its just like cell phone contracts, if you don't read the fine print, and get boned by a big cell phone then in reality it really is only your fault.
I don't feel bad for them, since they end up screwing me over.

Typically in the DC area, if the apartment is in good condition and not insanely priced, it will not last long. I've had people run in on me reading the lease and slapping down deposit checks as I read the Ts&Cs.

I'm following up because I DID resolve the issue with the apartment complex because I knew they would try to pull something like this. In addition to my letter, I included with each rent check an additional written letter AND wrote in the memo on the check a statment that "Dec. Payment, lease terminates in March". Or something to that extent, and as it got closer "Jan Payment, 60 days notice" and so on.

They didn't even 'realize' I was moving out until 1 week before the lease end date when I walked in with the keys and requested a walkthrough.

Since that time, I've had 4 apartments 'snatched' as I was taking time to review the lease agreement by people who were literally walking in off the street. While they may get fleeced, the problem for ME is that the default leases which we end up having to accept (because of competition) are horribly anti-tenant.

Another place wanted $2400 for a security Deposit, $2400 prepaid rent, and $2400 for a pet deposit (I have a pomeranian... ie: 4 lbs of nothing).

That wouldn't have been so bad except that when I originally agreed to the lease, there was NO pet deposit, and the rent was 2200, AND the prepaid rent was only going to be 1,100 since I was moving in on the 15th. I walked from that place since it was obvious that they would have tried to pull similar shenanigans at the end.

On the bright side, I eventually did find a place for $2100/month (A deal for what it is) and made the deal directly with the owner (skipped realty agencies). He is a laid back guy, and seemed just happy to be earning some money on his property (I guess he got hit with too many homes to flip when the market crashed).

He is getting a deal out of it, since I'm the type of person to fix up a place I stay in (ie: I'll repair walls as I repaint them. Basically any 'labor only' repairs as I adapt the house to my needs)

He didn't want a pet deposit, since he actually understood what little damage a 4lb dog can do, and never tried to pull any shenanigans to date.

But my basic rant is that people who don't read the contracts weaken the market for people like me who do.
jjeffeory
jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
Bloomington, IN

jjeffeory to openbox9

Member

to openbox9
Some states require longer notice, so it could end up being 30, 60, or 90 days. Be sure to check your local rules.
openbox9
Premium Member
join:2004-01-26
71144

openbox9

Premium Member

Re: another reason

State laws usually specify maximum/minimums allowable in landlord/tenant agreements. The lease typically falls in line with the laws. Personally, I've only ever seen 30 days, but I have no doubt that some states could be different.

n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY

n2jtx to ArrayList

Member

to ArrayList
said by ArrayList:

that I'm buying a house. landlords can be mighty shady.
Good plan but be careful that you choose an older neighborhood and not one what comes with an equivalent exclusive arrangement. There were stories on this site a while back about developers striking deals with providers to provide exclusive service to their newly built developments. Restrictive covenants can still bite you in a$$ despite being an owner.

ArrayList
DevOps
Premium Member
join:2005-03-19
Mullica Hill, NJ

ArrayList

Premium Member

Re: another reason

good idea i'll have to check up on that. its an older neighborhood, I have clearwire, comcast, and AT&T available. not to mention the choices with regular cellular internet.

off the top of my head i'm feeling good.
moonpuppy (banned)
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD

moonpuppy (banned)

Member

How to screw with management

Since you are going to have to spend $40 anyhow whether or not you have the service, get it and complain every single time it has issues. See how long that lasts and simply get both services.

r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX

r81984

Premium Member

I just experienced this

I signed a lease yesterday for an apt in Houston.

They have an exclusive deal with some crappy shill cable company called TVmax. This was the only time I wished I at least had comcrap.
TVmax internet is horrible. It is like $40 a month for 5 mbps, but you are limited to download less than 500 mb per 30 min or be throttled to 1.6 mbps and then you have a 80GB monthly cap with $1 a GB over that. Their TV is overpriced and they charge $4 a month per TV for a cable box.

I almost did not sign a lease because of this, but luckily ATT offers DSL so while I had to get cable TV through this shill company I was a able to get a 3 mbps dry loop DSL connection through ATT for $40. Hopefully the cap cancer that ATT is starting does not ever hit houston otherwise I will have no choice for internet.
Kearnstd
Space Elf
Premium Member
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

Kearnstd

Premium Member

Re: I just experienced this

you are exactly the person AT&T will target with caps, Someone with nowhere to run to, and no ability to say FU i am going to Comcast(or insert ISP here) where i at least get 250gb.
jjeffeory
jjeffeory
join:2002-12-04
Bloomington, IN

jjeffeory to r81984

Member

to r81984
I experienced the same thing many years ago in Louisiana. The apt had a deal with a satellite provider. The channel lineup was absolutely horrible, but included in the rental price. We got DirecTV ( after a fight with the landlord before we signed the lease) and DSL through BellSouth. We bought a house right after the lease was up...
hottboiinnc4
ME
join:2003-10-15
Cleveland, OH

hottboiinnc4 to r81984

Member

to r81984
TVMax is no longer in business. they were bought several years ago by another company, Ygnition, »www.ygnition.com/

r81984
Fair and Balanced
Premium Member
join:2001-11-14
Katy, TX

r81984

Premium Member

Re: I just experienced this

It does not matter who own's it, it is still called TVmax.
»www.tvmax.com/

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium Member
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

dvd536 to hottboiinnc4

Premium Member

to hottboiinnc4
said by hottboiinnc4:

TVMax is no longer in business. they were bought several years ago by another company, Ygnition, »www.ygnition.com/
I believe ive seen a few rants about them too.
different name / same crap.
tmc8080
join:2004-04-24
Brooklyn, NY

tmc8080 to r81984

Member

to r81984
said by r81984:

I signed a lease yesterday for an apt in Houston.

They have an exclusive deal with some crappy shill cable company called TVmax. This was the only time I wished I at least had comcrap.
TVmax internet is horrible. It is like $40 a month for 5 mbps, but you are limited to download less than 500 mb per 30 min or be throttled to 1.6 mbps and then you have a 80GB monthly cap with $1 a GB over that. Their TV is overpriced and they charge $4 a month per TV for a cable box.

I almost did not sign a lease because of this, but luckily ATT offers DSL so while I had to get cable TV through this shill company I was a able to get a 3 mbps dry loop DSL connection through ATT for $40. Hopefully the cap cancer that ATT is starting does not ever hit houston otherwise I will have no choice for internet.
This is one circumstance where I think you would have been better off with AT&T never bought Bell South. BS would have made areas such as Houston a priority for fiber upgrades. Deep south major cities were on the hotlist to get good upgrades-- however, Verizon seems to have muscled in on the more profitable ROI's up in northeast Texas courtesy of Bush 2-- some sweet geography swap for allowing AT&T to gobble up over 50% of the country's footprint.

BTW, all the FCC had to do was ammend the Cable order to apply to Telcos. You know, maybe two carriers isn't enough.. our infrastructure would withstand 3 or 4 carriers for triple play services. Hopefully this will happen sooner rather than later.
smitmor
join:2004-04-10
Springhill, LA

smitmor

Member

Re: I just experienced this

Houston was in SBC's footprint before the mega AT&T mergers. And SBC's deployment of DSL was nowhere close to Bellsouth's.
Cerlyn
Premium Member
join:2009-07-30

Cerlyn

Premium Member

Probably not quite legal, but for another reason

While I am not a lawyer, and this is in a different state (Texas) that mine, this might not be legal depending on how they did this; but for a reason which has nothing to do with the FCC.

At least in most states, when a complex decides to "submeter" the cost of utilities, trash pickup, etc., they are NOT allowed to charge significantly more than the underlying services cost them. For example: My apartment complex can charge the per-unit rate charged to them by the water utility, plus the cost for the submetering firm. But they are not allowed to charge more than that without going through a whole licensing process, and basically becoming a utility themselves.

So if I was in a complex which tried to do this, I would recommend contacting your state's Public Utility Commission to see if such behavior is allowed. The only way I could see it allowed is if someone was trying to exploit the loophole of not being able to make a profit from submetering by adding a huge additional cost to it.

••••
iansltx
join:2007-02-19
Austin, TX

iansltx

Member

Guess my landlord is cool...

DSL line from Qwest going into the complex for "free" (WiFi for all) and I have my own Comcast internet (and another guy in another apartment has Comcast cable). The landlord stuck with Qwest over switching to Comcast internet, but I'm not going to complain...trash is included, water is included and gas/electric are cheap.

Anonymous_
Anonymous
Premium Member
join:2004-06-21
127.0.0.1

1 edit

1 recommendation

Anonymous_

Premium Member

just leave the water running

24/7 in protest i bet you can use 50,000 gallons doing that in a month
PCDEC
join:2004-10-12
Allentown, PA

3 recommendations

PCDEC

Member

Re: just leave the water running

Tell the landlord as a courtesy you usually take short showers but if he insists on charging you this extra fee you will be forced to spend all of your free time in the shower.

zalternate
join:2007-02-22
freedom land

zalternate

Member

Loophole or crime?

Sure sounds like a crime, to cause financial hardship on a person due to their choosing another supplier.

Whats next? If you don't buy from the designated grocery store, you have to pay an extra $40 for garbage disposal due to 'bad for the environment' packaging from that store?

The courts are going to love this case.
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2

Premium Member

Re: Loophole or crime?

said by zalternate:

Sure sounds like a crime, to cause financial hardship on a person due to their choosing another supplier.

Whats next? If you don't buy from the designated grocery store, you have to pay an extra $40 for garbage disposal due to 'bad for the environment' packaging from that store?

The courts are going to love this case.
No they're not... they're not breaking any laws!

.. did you not see the word "loop hole" for one? Second, this kinda practice is done in many business models all over.. if that were the case, cable, phone & satellite companies and wireless services would not be giving you a discount for bundling or tying services together..

.. and if you want to make the argument that they're not forced, then fine... they'll just raise the rates of the "normal" bills and then "discount you" the $40 if you take the partner ISP of choice..

Credit card companies said you can't charge the extra 2.5% fee to credit card customers.. sooooooo, many businesses simply raised ALL the prices of products and services by 2.5% and then discount you if you pay cash.. ie, the "cash discount"...

There really isn't anything not-legal about what they're trying to do here... sorry.
WhatNow
Premium Member
join:2009-05-06
Charlotte, NC

WhatNow

Premium Member

grow some mold

Get a humidifier and start growing some mold and mildew then make them clean the apartment to make it safe.
fiberguy2
My views are my own.
Premium Member
join:2005-05-20

fiberguy2

Premium Member

Re: grow some mold

said by WhatNow:

Get a humidifier and start growing some mold and mildew then make them clean the apartment to make it safe.
Try again... willful damage to the unit comes out of your pocket... enjoy!
st7860
join:2004-05-13
San Francisco, CA

1 edit

st7860

Member

you should move to BC

in Vancouver BC renting is fun.

- max rent increase is about 4% a year
- if the landlord doesnt return your deposit or file a damage claim within 15 days after moving out, he/she automatically owes you DOUBLE the deposit
- if the landlord evicts you for something like "my family is going to move in", and you find out its not true, he owes you 2 months rent
- if the landlord evicts you for saying "my family is coming to move in", and he truly does it, he still owes you ONE MONTH rent
- lease automatically convert to month by month after the initial term is up. no auto renewing stuff here.

and

even if you're working in a job like mcdonalds, medical insurance is free with no copay.

•••

ArgMeMatey
join:2001-08-09
Milwaukee, WI

ArgMeMatey

Member

They need to ban kickbacks

Read your lease! Get a copy to look over before it has to be signed! Ask about all the utilities available and required! Remember, landlords lease apartments every day. You do it maybe once a year at most. They know more than you do and they're not going to share info that favors the tenant.

There aren't too many landlords out there who are in the business just for the fun of it. They are always looking for a piece of the action. If it's legal, and if it won't reduce occupancy, the landlord will do it.

It won't surprise anyone that cable companies and bulk billers offer landlords a great deal: Do bulk billing of "standard" analog cable and the landlord gets a great rate based on verifiable occupancy. Plus, the landlord gets a cut of any premium ongoing services that individual tenants choose, such as digital.

If the landlord chooses tenant billing and signs an access agreement, the landlord gets free cable at the rate of 1 per 100 units under agreement. That "free" service can be at the caretaker's apartment, a party room, or even at the landlord's house or his girlfriend's house. Landlords get a commission based on subscriber numbers. The higher the percentage subscribing, the better the commission.

If the landlord does enough business, they get a dedicated install tech and account manager.

What does cable want in return? Just the exclusive right to use the existing cable to units and space for their amplifier and distribution equipment. They do NOT demand exclusive access to the property, but how is the tenant going to get service in there? In older properties the telephone wiring isn't good enough for U-Verse, and the landlord can refuse permission for a satellite contractor to add wiring and mount dishes.

Bill Neilson
Premium Member
join:2009-07-08
Alexandria, VA

1 recommendation

Bill Neilson

Premium Member

I see many people with landlord nightmares

As a landlord myself (of 3 different properties), I will just say that tenant nightmares are just as bad

I personally do not have any sort of auto-renewal. I just give them a date to let me know and I put that in the contract. I also have a heart so if I feel someone has a legitimate issue (such as wife moving out of town), I do what I can to maybe find someone to fill in for the tenant (sub-lease) or maybe just cancel the rest of the lease if they are close to the end anyway and have been good tenants. I am not out to screw anyone whatsoever.

With that said, some tenants can be such a hassle with destroying property then wondering why I am charging them....signing a lease then wanting to get out (without any major issues from the building)....and other issues.

I know some landlords who make me shake my head with disgust. I also just got done with a tenant who made my life hell. He destroyed the house, broke MULTIPLE parts of the lease, and then tried to get in my face about me making up parts of the damage.....except his own girlfriend told me about most of them and I saw it first hand with pictures. Geez....

dcurrey
Premium Member
join:2004-06-29
Mason, OH

dcurrey

Premium Member

Bundled services

They could always argue this is a bundled service discount. They don't get the discount unless the get the triple play water, garbage and cable.

ArgMeMatey
join:2001-08-09
Milwaukee, WI

ArgMeMatey

Member

Re: Bundled services

Agreed; Offering discounts instead of assessing surcharges is much wiser, from a tenant's perspective.

If I were still in the business, I would offer a discount for paying on the first of the month, no discount for paying on the 5th, and a huge penalty for paying after the 5th. I could also see rewarding tenants for paying early every month, for example a big discount on the last month's rent each year. Experience tells me the late fees would easily offset the cost of early payment incentives.

But maybe the FCC could "assign" the inside wiring to the tenant, and require a landlord to provide equal access to competitive providers at the same level as the incumbent provider. Of course that may have the effect of depriving the landlord or the cable company of their property, and chances are lobbyists would soundly defeat any such proposal if there weren't a constitutional challenge as seen in eminent domain exercises.

coldsprings
@sidlinger.com

coldsprings

Anon

no other isp

Where i live in coldsprings texas i live in a big community that only allows dsl @ 70 a month for 384k down and 128 up there is cable right out side of this community called sundenlink but thay cant move into here so we are stuck becuse the community aka landlords are getting kick backs here its not cool at all here its nice to have dsl but i could get over 6mb for less but thats the way it is here
Mark H
Premium Member
join:2008-05-18
Sterling Heights, MI

Mark H

Premium Member

An apartment building is like a restaurant.

An apartment building is like a restaurant. Customers buy services from the owner. One can not expect to bring his own food into a restaurant, order a pop, and sit at a table eating the food not sold there. Same thing goes for an apartment building. If the owner is selling a television service you can buy the service offered or find an apartment that fits your needs.

Ben
Premium Member
join:2007-06-17
Fort Worth, TX

Ben

Premium Member

Do Many Complexes Have Such Agreements?

     I've never lived in such a place, and any apartment I ever checked out, never had such an agreement.  At my place, I can use whatever company is capable of providing the service to me.

     While I have seen some apartments supposedly offer "Free Internet," I've never considered living in such a place.  My concern being that I figure it'd then be the landlord's network, and thus he's free to snoop the network traffic.  Perhaps I'm old fashioned, but in the same way that he doesn't have the right to read my mail, I don't feel he has the right to know what I download or upload, or how much.

     How many apartment complexes even have such agreements anyway?

CCNnorthcali
join:2004-03-07
San Francisco, CA

CCNnorthcali

Member

Re: Do Many Complexes Have Such Agreements?

Where I live in Arizona (near Arizona State University) almost all of the nice complexes have contracts with Cox. They flat out block you from getting Qwest, and service from Cox is not included in the rent. I've shopped around and this seems to be the norm.

hhawkman
Premium Member
join:2001-02-08
Port Hueneme, CA

hhawkman

Premium Member

Re: Do Many Complexes Have Such Agreements?

said by CCNnorthcali:

Where I live in Arizona (near Arizona State University) almost all of the nice complexes have contracts with Cox. They flat out block you from getting Qwest, and service from Cox is not included in the rent. I've shopped around and this seems to be the norm.
I lived in that area for a couple of years around 2001-2002. Most of the newer complexes were prewired from central points. which is part of the reason they are nicer complexes. In fact in many of them, Cox actually came in during construction and wired all the apt's at their cost. In order to bring in another carrier, beit Cable or internet, it requires new lines run to and around the bldg's. 1. this becomes unsightly. 2. Cable Installers are notoriously known for sloppy work.
My in-laws had a home out there, and when they wired for cable they didn't bury the lines, they chipped off the stucco on the home, and generally left a mess.

New carriers bring new Lawn Boxes, usually right next to the old boxes, and generally destroy the landscaping. Complexes and condo owners don't like that.
33358088 (banned)
join:2008-09-23

2 edits

33358088 (banned)

Member

heres another way

get your landlords son to set up a massive wifi ( oh like i do ) and resell it to the tenants. as its a actual tenant doing it .....
they cant stop it. TRY.

and my own father is one of the most respected of the local landlord association speaks also volumes, that he donates time ot habitat for humanity and other charities, shows how being a landlord should be. IT is after all about helping people with housing needs and YES making a lil money.

P.S. also my father, knowing i have a disability helped me get internet with BCE with a three year contract ....in the 2 years i was with BCE he only had to help with 2 payments when my bad back prevented me from gathering enough income and today i have shared internet. The WiFi setup is a good thing for landlords and if you think 1megabit is enough it isn't. 2megabit in my tests for avg user uses is required. WHY? things like face book and flash eat tons a bandwidth.

so get two tsi lines with dry loops etc and taxes ....110$ bond and you have enough for 5 tenants at 2 megabit. Each tenant pays 25$ , network maintenance and into a hardware fund.
simple isn't it.........capping and throttling ruin this....and then you have no need to bother....and then user based billing came ....again ruins innovation and competition....

IN the reverse the previous landlord i had broke into my room messed it up wrecked a computer and illegally tried to remove me form the premisis. I hear form grape vine he does this all the time to people, and that someone or somehow two of his houses burnt to the ground. Funny how life works out my dad expands to 4 houses , that bad landlord is down 2 houses.

AND rememeber folks one big thing about being a tenant that when you rent the room becomes legally YOURS ( canada )
unlike hollywood that when you buy something you never own it and they dictate how you own it. AND think about throttling
if a landlord had the right to dictate how i used my room OH BOY

1.no using electricity between 4PM and 2AM or you can only use power for half a light bulb

2.your only allowed during that time to stand in one spot in your room

3.YOU can't bring anything you own into this space , only what the landlord gives you. Sorry no BED FOR YOU.

4.anyhting you bring into this space becomes copyright controlled by the owner and thus becomes his property for the next 50 years....what does 50 year copyright do for YOU?

5.your not allowed to have visitors of any kind, if you do they must be priorly approved by landlord.

6.you also can only come and go form the place when your told by said landlord

and a lil shot at geists math about the CRIA lawsuit
if 300,000 artists are involved and they each made ONE tune
at 20000$ per each tune
THAT IS SIX BILLION DOLLARS

most artists on a album make 10-15 songs

that is SIXTY BILLION to NINETY BILLION DOLLARS
literally all the profit holly wood has made in the past 20 years and then some

FROM ONE COUNTRY AND A SMALL ONE
think about it people that dont buy hollywood is working
they aren't even paying there people , cause if they did theyd be broke and in the hole
stufried
Premium Member
join:2003-10-13

stufried

Premium Member

What Happens if You Don't Want Broadband?

What happens if you simply don't want broadband?
qworster
join:2001-11-25
Bryn Mawr, PA

1 edit

qworster

Member

Most landlords = scum!

I'm suing my old landlord now. I lived there 19 months-until I decided to leave because of the gang gunfight right out front. First he claimed that I only gave him 2800 dollars for a security drposit (I have a receipt for 3100). Next he claimed that he had to repaint the entire apt. and charged me 800 dollars to do so-when the original paint job was water based paint (latex) that they painted over oil based paints-any professional painter knows that oil and water doesn't mix! Within a few months, big strips of paint began peeling off the walls and trim-and now he wants to charge ME for this!
They also charged me 150 dollars to replace screens that were never there in the first place (the housing inspector noted them missing in his routine inspection). Fianlly, they charged me 250 dollars for moving out five days late-when the last two days were because his agent was too 'busy' to come and inspect.

They actually had the balls to tell me that the 'damage' to the apt was $2850-50 dollars MORE then what they claimed I paid them!

I found out that they do this to EVERY tenant they rent to-no one gets ANY of their security deposit back.

It's almost as if they feel entitled to keep that money.

I might actually try a class action suit if I can get enough former tenants to agree.
stufried
Premium Member
join:2003-10-13

stufried

Premium Member

Re: Most landlords = scum!

qworster,

I don't know California law, but my state requires security deposits to be escrowed in a separate account. It might be interesting to subpoena these records to Court and see if he complied whether the law, or embezzled the funds a long time ago and is trying to justify not having to "fork out $3,100 of his own money."

MinnSlowpoke
@qwest.net

MinnSlowpoke

Anon

"SkyPix" and my complex's inability to get cable

Greetings friends. I have some questions that perhaps some of you could help me with.

My apartment building (in Minneapolis) apparently has some sort of agreement with a company called "SkyPix" (a semi-local company that seems to specialize in providing MDUs with DirecTV... their website is skypix.tv). According to my landlord, the only options for premium TV is through SkyPix/DirecTV. I have checked with comcast and they told me that my building is able to get service but that the building owner will not allow it. As it turns out, I am fine with DirecTV, but I want to have the option to use comcast for my internet as it is multiples faster than what Qwest offers.

Would this ruling by the FCC have any impact on my landlord's ability to prevent access to any non-DirecTV provider? Are they now required to allow access to comcast's service?

Does it appear legal that my landlord allows only DirecTV (through this SkyPix provider) AND that skypix charges me a monthly $10 fee that they claim is for "access to the bulding's dish"? This seems to me like they are not only giving me one choice, BUT that this one choice is raising the price for the same service someone else could get for less.

I know my main objective isn't to get a different video-content provider, but my landlord has told me that the reason they don't allow Comcast to service the building is because they have a contract with SkyPix for DirecTV.

Does this ruling even apply to satellite based content-providers or does it ONLY apply to exclusive CABLE agreements?

I know this is a lot of stuff but it is one of my biggest complaints with this apartment. It is the difference between a 1.5M and 12+M connection. Thank you so much for your input!