Is this a monopoly? Another, cheaper and comparatively similar cable service is available, however, they are not allowed to provide service to the building.
I just don't understand how the owners of our building could force its tenants to use only one service when there are others available and more economic.
How is this legal. It was nowhere in the lease that we would not be able to use a different cable service.
Please help.
2007-12-05 02:15:16 · 9 answers · asked by Cesaria Barbarossa 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
WOW, the other cable provider, does service our city. I know that for a fact.
2007-12-05 02:30:24 · update #1
Yes, it is totally legal. In fact, I'm guessing that your local municipality already has a contract with Comcast to be the exclusive provider for your area. As such, I doubt your complex really has much of a choice unless they wanted to install a satellite system for the entire complex.
BTW, I didn't mention that it's fair. It's not, and it's about time municipalities stop allowing these monopolies.
2007-12-05 02:20:04 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I live in a townhouse which I own. I'm going through exactly what you're going through, well, sort of. I actually want Comcast, but RCN has the rights to this development. It's perfectly legal. RCN owns the cable underground and they maintain exclusive rights to it. One block away in either direction, people have Comcast! Chicago is really all about politics and clout. I knew this when I moved here, but even the cable companies are involved?! *sigh*
2016-04-07 10:25:50 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, it's legal. What is probably happening is the apartment complex pays Comcast a fee so they can exclusively serve that building, I bet you get cable at a slightly cheaper price too. This is actually quite common, I bet your landlord owns a lot of buildings in the area, and probably has the same deal setup at all of them.
2007-12-05 02:28:38 · answer #3 · answered by Pfo 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You'll find that the entire CITY has a contract with Comcast. It is never just one building,...you just relocated to a city that has a Comcast thing. When I relocated to S.Jersey, then to Philly, I was no longer a Cablevision Customer, it was Comcast everywhere. I too have issues with comcast...the only way to beat them, is to go to DirecTV, or such. No bargain, either way. Good luck...
2007-12-05 02:27:09 · answer #4 · answered by longhair140 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Absolutely legal.. The owner has the right to set up any contract with any venders they choose. It is done mostly for pre-wired buidings that the cable supplier has to maintain. When you sign a contract with your landlord he/she has the right to decide which vendors they want to maintain their property.. Remember YOU are not the owner and have no rights to decide of to whom you want to maintain that property. Many time smaller cable companies offer a lower price but their wiring is sub-standard and the picture quality is poor.
2007-12-05 02:38:54 · answer #5 · answered by Ditka 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Try asking the competing cable company why they can't service you.As far as I know the apt complex cannot enter a restrictive service contract without your approval.
2007-12-05 02:22:12 · answer #6 · answered by who am I 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I say buck the system, call Dish Network.
2007-12-05 04:43:41 · answer #7 · answered by HotSteel 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Call zoning and ask them. Odds are they can,
2007-12-05 02:19:38 · answer #8 · answered by wizjp 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's BS. They can't do that. Order from whom you want.
2007-12-05 02:21:54 · answer #9 · answered by doug4jets 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋