Foxtel

[rickmick]

G'day All

Does anyone have any ideas on paying for the installation of a service like Foxtel to an IP?

The property is one in a medium size group of units. Apparently some of the tenants want access to Foxtel and the buildings are already semi-wired up.

I thought it would be reasonable to split the cost with the tenant but the managing agent seems to think that would be unfair as they can't take the dish or whatever else is involved with them when they leave.

Anyone had an experience with this sort of thing?



Rick

 

[Ross Sneddon]

Hi Rick

In a building where "cabling" is installed, the owner pays for it.

Electricity, Telephone, TV, High speed cabling etc.,

I think it is your responsibility


Regards

Ross

 

[handyandy]

Hi Rick

My attitude is that it is a luxury that the tenant wants and as such the tenant should pay for.

Mind you my view is that the tenant should also pay for the telephone installation \ reconnection. Having had this argument on a number of occasions I now remove all telephones, phone books etc from properties and instruct the managing agent to state that the phone line may or may not be connected but it is the tenant responsibility regardless. The tenant should not assume just because there is a phone jack that there a servicable phone connection.

A number of my tenants have requested "Cable" and even when its been connected to the entire block of units for all the units to avail themselves of the service each tenant has paid for the installation to their unit. In these cases the cable company has subsidised the connection to the building.

Unless the building has been wired with suitable cable, which is unlikely, it is easier to install a dish rather than a cable.

hth

 

[Ross Sneddon]

Hi Rick

We are talking different things. Sorry, I understood that the cable, either phone or TV or high speed broad band was to be installed to the property, in which case I suggest that you are the beneficiery.

Connection to the installed cable to phone etc., is the responsibility of the tenant.

Installation V Connection.

Regards

Ross

 

[Jamie]

Hi All,

I agree with Ross. Enabling cable TV and Broadband internet access is a definite selling point to attract tenants, and as such I believe is the responsibility of the owner. Like Ross said, once the tenant leaves you still have the hook-up. The tenant also has to pay around $80 month for hi speed access, so I think its a bit much to ask them to pay for installation as well.

Also, if you pay for a broadband modem, the cost is tax deductible (Sim?) and the unit itself can be depreciated itself over its effective life. I guess it all depends on your personal situation, and whether the tenant/rental situation warrants you paying for the set-up. In particular, if you had a reliable, long term tenant, in a brand new, or near new building, in the current renters market I would be doing everything possible to secure a long term lease.

Just my thoughts,

Jamie.

 

[JoannaK]

It is the strata responsiblity for the initial installation of the satellite or cable connection and can cost anything from $360 per unit, and the occupants responsibility for the connection to the apartment.

Like the telephone, it is not considered to be an essential service, so the landlord has no obligation here, however, it does make a good selling point. Landlords are responsible for essential services only, eg water and electricity.

I've had numerous disagreements with tenants of brand new properties where they've had to pay an extra $250 for a new telephone line connection, and always advise up front to both the tenant and the landlord that a 50/50 split is the easiest way to resolve it. I would suggest a similar approach here - and it really does give the tenant more "ownership" of the property, meaning if they invest a little of their own cash they're likely to stay longer.