I've been going by the FCC Q&A posted here:
http://www.fcc.gov/guides/over-air-reception-devices-rule#QA
Highlighting added by me
*Q: If I live in a condominium or an apartment building, does this rule
apply to me? *
*A: *The rule applies to antenna users who live in a multiple dwelling
unit building, such as a condominium or apartment building, if the
antenna user has an exclusive use area in which to install the antenna.
"Exclusive use" means an area of the property that only you, and persons
you permit, may enter and use to the exclusion of other residents. For
example, your condominium or apartment may include a balcony, terrace,
deck or patio that only you can use, and the rule applies to these
areas. /_The rule does not apply to common areas, such as the roof_/,
the hallways, the walkways or the exterior walls of a condominium or
apartment building. Restrictions on antennas installed in these common
areas are not covered by the Commission's rule. _/For example, the rule
would /__/*not*/__/apply to restrictions that prevent drilling through
the exterior wall /__/of a condominium or rental unit and thus
restrictions may prohibit installation that requires such drilling./_
Don't think so. The rules are clear that permitted restrictions have
to be "reasonable" and if there is a "conflict" the burden of proof is
on the landlord.
Further, restrictions cannot violate the impairment clause in section
2.2 i.e. may not unreasonable delay or increase costs, or preclude
reception or transmission of an acceptable quality signal.
This article, written by an attorney, addresses most of the
misconceptions that have been voiced here
http://www.wba-law.com/Unique_Practice_Areas/Homeowners_Associations/
John
-----Original Message-----
From: "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, March 16, 2015 9:24pm
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Angry landlord over Roof mount antenna
OTARD says the landlord can't tell you not to put an antenna on the
house. The landlord absolutely *can* tell you not to put holes in his
property. The FCC website on the topic spells this out pretty clearly.
I.E.: OTARD protects you if you can manage to install without any
penetrations. This is why you'll see apartment complexes with dishes
clamped on the deck railings and they make flat coax to go in through
a window.
OTARD rules cover it.
It's s town home so you can mount anywhere on their portion of the
building including the roof.
If he has an issue with the cable and holes he needs to talk to
the renter.
You could also let him know that quality internet service makes
his property more rentable.
On Monday, March 16, 2015, Darin Steffl <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hey all,
So I got an angry call from a owner of a townhouse who rents
it out to one of our new internet customers. We were never
made aware the home was a rental in any way. Our techs always
ask permission on where to mount the dish and bring in the
wire and they were given approval to mount the dish on the
roof and drill a hole for the wire. If it was a rental, we
would have talked to the landlord.
The home owner now wants us to remove the dish, cable, and
holes and restore everything to original condition. He wants
new siding, new shingles, the whole works.
I don't exactly know how I should handle this situation. We
won't be pulling the mount off the roof because it is sealed
if we leave it there. We can't move the dish because the
signal is only good there. Do we have any sort of protection
from OTARD or anything that allows us to keep things in place
since we were given permission from the tenant?
Ideas or ways to handle this smoothly? We are not going to pay
for new siding or roofing when we were given permission to
install. If anything, the tenant would be responsible since we
did the work on their behalf.
--
Darin Steffl
Minnesota WiFi
www.mnwifi.com <http://www.mnwifi.com/>
507-634-WiFi
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi> Like us on Facebook
<http://www.facebook.com/minnesotawifi>
