Is 'no satellite dish clause' unfair/illegal?

Sunny said:
Obviously that was what I meant. He is an owner as he said himself he bought the property. A residents association is only made up of owners but its not called an owners association. At least I never have never heard that. And I don't have that problem with renters in my devlopment. They wouldn't even know an AGM is on because they don't get notice about it.
Click to expand...

A residents association is made up of RESIDENTS!! They do not have to be owners and frequently aren't - in my experience.
 
shesells said:
A residents association is made up of RESIDENTS!! They do not have to be owners and frequently aren't - in my experience.
Click to expand...

Why would allow someone renting a say in making permanent decisions with regard to your development? Only owners are members of our residents committee as we are responsible for spending management fees. People renting in our development have to go through their landlords if they want something changed.
 
There's a difference between a Residents Association and and being elibible to vote and decide things at an AGM. I would be deeply concerned at tenants having any say at an AGM, nevermind a vote equal to that of an owner.
 
John Rambo said:
There's a difference between a Residents Association and and being elibible to vote and decide things at an AGM. I would be deeply concerned at tenants having any say at an AGM, nevermind a vote equal to that of an owner.
Click to expand...

I know that but all I know is how things work in our development. A residents committee is elected every year at the AGM (so only owners eligible). This committee liases with the agent throughout the year on certain projects such as security and maintenance and all major expenditure is put to the committee for approval. Not sure what other resident committees do but why would you allow someone renting to have a say in how the development is run and money is spent and be part of the committee? Tennants never have a vote at the AGM under any circumstances.
 
Sunny said:
Why would allow someone renting a say in making permanent decisions with regard to your development? Only owners are members of our residents committee as we are responsible for spending management fees. People renting in our development have to go through their landlords if they want something changed.
Click to expand...

Generally a residents association is a talking shop more than an organisation with finances to manage.

Residents associations do not collect management fees, if so surely you are talking about a management company. If you have an AGM and set management fees then it sounds like a management company to me.

Tenants are not members of management companies, only owners are. However all residents are surely entitled to be part of a residents association?
 
shesells said:
Generally a residents association is a talking shop more than an organisation with finances to manage.

Residents associations do not collect management fees, if so surely you are talking about a management company. If you have an AGM and set management fees then it sounds like a management company to me.

Tenants are not members of management companies, only owners are. However all residents are surely entitled to be part of a residents association?
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Our development obviously does things differently. Look, I am not confused about what a management company is. I am a director of mine so I wouldn't want to be. I was just curious how other developments did it.

All I am saying is that every year at the Company's AGM, we elect a residents committee for the upcoming year. This residents committee is responsible for liasing with residents and the management agent with regard to any issues that residents have or any changes they want made. Its basically the face of the management company. This committee has the power to get the agent to carry out any remedial work up to a certain point that may be necessary that may not have be raised at the AGM without having to call an EGM to get residents approval. For example, this year, our committee on the back of increased security concerns raised by residents authorised the agent to install extra security devices even though it wasn't in the budget approved at the AGM. I never said this committee set management fees. I just said they have the power to spend some of it so thats why we don't allow people renting to be part of it.

If people renting want something changed, they are free to contact the committee through their landlord. As I say though, it is obvious that other developments do things differently. Nothing wrong either way. Apologies to the OP for taking this off topic and the issue of satellite dishes and human rights.
 
Yes. The dishes do look ugly when you see a lot of them, looks slummish. solly. Companies need to re-design.
 
The managing agent removed a satellite dish you erected from a wall owned by the management company. You do not own the external walls and should be held liable for any remedial work. It's seems to me very few people understand the law in this area. I'd recommend that 'Apartment Living in Ireland' book by Robert Goggin.
 
the satellite dish was on the roof on a special postament, not wall erected.
 
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif']Human Rights in Private Law[/FONT]
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] By Daniel Friedmann, Daphne Barak-Erez[/FONT]
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif']Page 171:[/FONT]

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif']“[/FONT][FONT='Times New Roman','serif']2. Freedom of expression under Article 10 of the ECHR and German private law [/FONT]

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] To a certain extent, Article 10 of the ECHR constitutes the counterpoint to Article 8 of the Convention; whereas the latter protects different elements of privacy, Article 10 safeguards the participation of the individual in the social process of communication.[/FONT]

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'](a) [/FONT][FONT='Times New Roman','serif']The Application of Article 10 of the ECHR by German Courts in Civil Proceedings[/FONT]

[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] Article 10 of the ECHR plays a less significant role than Article 8 in German private law.[/FONT]
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] Article 10 and the German law of landlord and tenant: the Magistrate’s Court (Amtsgericht) of Tauberbischofsheim in the State of Bavaria was required to decide whether the tenant of an apartment can demand that his landlord allow him to install a satellite dish on property belonging to the landlord. Under German law, a landlord is required to allow the installation of a satellite dish only if there is no other adequate possibility –for example, through cable-of receiving the normal variety of television programmes. In this case, the tenant was of Turkish origin and wanted to receive Turkish television broadcasts by satellite, which he could not receive by cables or the airwaves. The court found as an important reason to allow the tenant to install the dish the fact that it would provide him with an appropriate source of information. This was based on the tenant’s freedom of expression and information under Article 10 of the ECHR.[/FONT]
[FONT='Times New Roman','serif'] We can assume that the court applied Article 8 of the Convention rather than Article 5 of the German Constitution, which also guarantees freedom of information, because there was a transnational dimension to the case’s set of facts. A Turkish citizen living in Germany wanted to receive television broadcasts from Turkey. “[/FONT]
 
sorin said:
the satellite dish was on the roof on a special postament, not wall erected.
Click to expand...

Is it an apartment? I'm assuming it is. All apartment owners should know about these issues and I'd recommend that book. With an apartment you do not own the outside areas so cannot unilaterally erect a satellite dish.
 
well I do think that the role of the management company is to try to make the living conditions better not only to read some books
 
That is completely irrelevant. The point is apartment owners DO NOT OWN the outside walls or roof. The right to have a satellite dish does not supercede property rights. The homeless guy sleeping outside Burger King cannot cite human rights and lash a satellite dish up on their wall. It's makes no sense to think you have the right to erect a satellite dish on property you do not own. Yes, many people have a difficulty with this as they've paid large sums of money for apartments but it is the reality. I've said it before and I'll say it again...this area of management agents, management companies and apartment living is a minefield. I'm no expert, but I do have experience on a residents committee as treasurer, have worked with management agents and have read my own leases. That coupled with information obtained on this site helps me understand this area. People could do a lot worse than reading that 'Guide to Apartment Living' book by Robert Goggin. Heard him on Gerry Ryan's show and he spoke a lot of sense about these matters. (and I've no connection with this guy!)
 
you don't own the air also, so, following your logic, kindly please stop using it
 
sorin - i have to ask at this stage - have you read ANY of this thread?

You are posting in an extremely childish manner and you are (a) not making any sense, (b) being 'smart' and (c) posting in such a manner as to have yourself at worst banned, at best, not taken seriously by anyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top