It seems that OTARD was intended more to deal with HOA BS than tenant rights. Thankfully I have never had to deal with it. Thankfully I never intend to become a rental tenant again. As far as the WISP is concerned, I would think this would be a matter to turn over to whoever underwrites their liability insurance and let them argue with the landlord about what constitutes damage. John Woodfield, President Delmarva WiFi Inc. 410-870-WiFi
-----Original Message----- From: "Mathew Howard" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 2:16pm To: "af" <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Angry landlord over Roof mount antenna Don't get me wrong, if I was the landlord I certainly wouldn't consider it a huge damage problem... I might even consider it an improvement, but I'm not the landlord. In my opinion, it's the tenants responsibility anyway, since we're only doing what they hired us to do... but it's still a fight I'd want to try to avoid. On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 1:08 PM, Ken Hohhof <[ [email protected] ]( mailto:[email protected] )> wrote: Most owners of residential rental property worry more about the tenant using it as a meth lab or grow house or “party house”. You folks must live in a very upscale neighborhood if a J-pipe foot on the roof and a nicely caulked up 1/4 inch hole in the siding is a huge damage problem requiring that roofers and siding contractors be called to install all new stuff. Maybe this is why rental areas of Kansas City got passed over as Google Fiber fiberhoods. Ooooooh, we need to drill a hole in the wall. Oh, the humanity! From: [ Mathew Howard ]( mailto:[email protected] ) Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 12:55 PM To: [ af ]( mailto:[email protected] ) Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Angry landlord over Roof mount antenna I'm pretty any changes you make to someone else's property could be considered damage unless it's normal wear and tear. The fact is, it's going to cost the landlord money if he wants it put back to the original condition, it might not be reasonable in most people opinion to put it back to the original condition, but I see no reason he wouldn't have the right it... who is responsible is another matter, but I don't think you can really argue there was no damage. On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 12:47 PM, Mike Hammett <[ [email protected] ]( mailto:[email protected] )> wrote: As I said, I think we differ. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions [ http://www.ics-il.com ]( http://www.ics-il.com ) From: "Travis Johnson" <[ [email protected] ]( mailto:[email protected] )> To: [ [email protected] ]( mailto:[email protected] ) Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 12:37:38 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Angry landlord over Roof mount antenna Installing a J-mount (drilling holes in a roof) and cable penetration (drilling a hole in the side of the house) is DEFINITELY damage to the property. Any warranty on the roof becomes null and void unless a certified roofer does the work and certifies the install. Drilling a hole through the siding and house is also damage. Travis On 3/17/2015 11:28 AM, Mike Hammett wrote: I think we differ on what constitutes damage. Installing a J-mount and a cable penetration, no. Not sealing the above properly and water or critters intrude upon the structure, yes. ----- Mike Hammett Intelligent Computing Solutions [ http://www.ics-il.com ]( http://www.ics-il.com ) From: "Travis Johnson" [ mailto:[email protected] ]( mailto:[email protected] ) To: [ [email protected] ]( mailto:[email protected] ) Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2015 12:26:21 PM Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Angry landlord over Roof mount antenna Tenants do not have the right to damage my property, regardless of their rights and due process. Travis On 3/17/2015 11:19 AM, John Woodfield wrote: Many landlords with that attitude end up criminally charged. There is such a thing as tenant rights and due process. Sent from my iPhone On Mar 17, 2015, at 1:15 PM, Josh Luthman <[ [email protected] ]( mailto:[email protected] )> wrote: It sounds right to me. He owns the land and property. Owner is king of his castle. Josh Luthman Office: [ 937-552-2340 ]( tel:937-552-2340 ) Direct: [ 937-552-2343 ]( tel:937-552-2343 ) 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Mar 17, 2015 1:13 PM, "John Woodfield" <[ [email protected] ]( mailto:[email protected] )> wrote: I'm calling BS on this. Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 17, 2015, at 12:43 PM, Travis Johnson <[ [email protected] ]( > mailto:[email protected] )> wrote: > > You still have to work it out with the actual owner, regardless of what the > tenant told you or even signed. > > Travis > >> On 3/17/2015 10:16 AM, Seth Mattinen wrote: >>> On 3/17/15 9:11, Travis Johnson wrote: >>> I would talk to the tenant and try and resolve things, but the ISP is >>> who did the actual damage to the property, without permission. Yes, they >>> "assumed" they had permission, but without a signed contract from the >>> legal owner of the property, the ISP does not have permission to cause >>> damage to the property. >> >> >> What do you do if your tenants misrepresent themselves as the owner with >> authority? >> >> ~Seth >
