jc100
join:2002-04-10
| reply to ptrowski
Re: Not as bad...
My question, how can they legally do this? Public property = Sidewalk and the curb. As far as I know, a company just can't demand usage of your lawn? Wouldn't this woman had to agree to the service? Otherwise, I would imagine she would have a nice lawsuit against Comcast. Just curious. |
|
ptrowski
Got Helix?
Premium
join:2005-03-14
Putnam, CT
clubs: | Depends on the towns. Easements I believe can extend out from the sidewalk a bit. |
|
GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| reply to jc100
said by jc100  :My question, how can they legally do this? Public property = Sidewalk and the curb. As far as I know, a company just can't demand usage of your lawn? Wouldn't this woman had to agree to the service? Otherwise, I would imagine she would have a nice lawsuit against Comcast. Just curious. Local townships pass easement laws giving utilities, cable companies, telcos an OK to put things on your property. It is all legal whether you like it or not. What do you think those franchise agreements are for?
--
My BLOG .. .. Internet News .. .. My Web Page |
|
marigolds
Gainfully employed, finally
Premium,MVM
join:2002-05-13
Saint Louis, MO
| reply to jc100
It's stupid cities not paying attention to their franchise language, or state level franchises that have no language.
Cities can include language requiring appropriate compensation to offset property value loss from installing equipment like this in the easement. States can too, but I have yet to see a state include it in their statewide franchise law.
(California is one of those states with a statewide franchise law that allows easements anywhere necessary on private property and has no requirement for compensation for lost property value. It does require repair of damage, but with no definition of adequate repair.)
--
ISCABBS - the oldest and largest BBS on the Internet
telnet://bbs.iscabbs.com
Professional Geographer
Geographic Information Science researcher |
|
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Not as stupid as you may think. The cities and towns are not turning a blind eye to this sort of stuff, they condone it.
See, if the cable company or the phone company have to dig up your lawn, and put a box here and there, no skin of the town fathers' nose. Grass grows back, and there is minimal disruption to the flow of traffic.
Mandate the use of street area, and all of a sudden, you've got traffic woes, torn up pavement, dust, etc.
The town powers that be WANT the likes of Verizon, AT&T and Comcast digging your lawn instead of ripping up blacktop.
And if you ask me, it makes perfect sense....
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… |
|
rradina
join:2000-08-08
Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to jc100
Believe it or not, modern subdivision easements extend from the street all the way to your home's foundation. Yes, this means they can come and dig up your yard anytime they please. Jack hammer your driveway whenever they want. Destroy your flower beds without notice.
They do have to restore them but some items, like big trees, cannot be replaced and you just have to live with it.
This is not a bad law because if a gas line is leaking, you certainly want the utility to come in an fix it and not have to get permission from six different neighbors only to find out two are snow birds and out-of-town in Florida for the next four months. Unfortunately it fees like a "bend over" moment whenever it happens but it's one of those Star Trek moments where "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one".
I suppose the challenge is that with any power like this, there's bound to be abuse. In my opinion, that's why local franchises were good. If a cable company has to come in and please your local municipality, it's a bit closer to home when a local alderman can complain rather than your state's attorney general. I also see the other side in that local franchises are not efficient since it is necessary to get agreements from thousands in each state. There's no perfect solution but I would certainly rather deal with inefficiency versus losing your voice about what happens in your own community. That's why I generally oppose state-wide franchises because the easement power will be abused -- no question about it. |
|
ykronic
Premium
join:2006-01-31
Canada | reply to jc100
at least up here the government can claim up to 4' or 6' I believe of lawn exending out from the sidewalk |
|
jc100
join:2002-04-10
| Ya and what gets me, try sending the city the bill for maintaining that piece of property =). Bet you won't get far. Franchise deals are a crock. I still believe it's your land and people need permission to change it. The same goes for these new eminent domain laws that allow businesses to randomly take your property. That was a load of crap when the Supreme Court said that was legal. Before, eminent domain meant only the city had this power. |
|
BSD24
Tier 4
Premium
join:2008-04-30
Middleboro, MA
clubs:
·Comcast
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to jc100
jc100 - read the agreement with Comcast. Most likely this customer they are talking about already had an UNDERGROUND connection to Comcast. Underground has been around for a very very very long time, it all depends on the community you live in. Some are U/G for other reasons, but most likely reasons is that is how the town/city is setup already. All this was was an upgrade cap that protects the access point where the connection is made.
I bet you this womens other utilities are running thru same or nearby aswell, this is standard procedures for cable operators across the country. It is legal - given you take a look at cable operator's "User Agreements". You probably didn't even know that the agreement shows Comcast owns the sections after the first 12 inches of cable that exit the home.
Another point, is there is a huge difference between an underground connect, meaning that is how the customer connects to Comcast (depends on city town because of telephone poles and regulations, or if the customer is more than 300feet from aerial drop), and the huge boxes that AT&T is using on poles and in the lawns of consumers. AT&T must have the boxes on the poles because of the way they deliver the service. U-VERSE is very difficult, only 1 or 2 device(s) in a home can talk back (upstream) in most cases at one time. The technology is expensive and very limited on what it can and its future is even very limited. When I think of U-VERSE I think of USELESS and A JOKE! |
|
