rwi@naucse.UUCP (Robert Wier) (11/15/88)
Subject: Re: Inside House Wiring
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems,misc.consumer
Summary: apartment wiring
References: <telecom-v08i0179m02@vector.UUCP>
Recently, when I moved to an apartment due to a new job, I made
arrangements to have a (single party, residential) phone line
connected. I did this from out-of-state by calling the business
office in the area code where I now reside. When I finally
arrived at my apartment about 3 weeks later, I plugged in my
phone, and guess what? No dial tone. I called repair, and they
informed me that since I had turned down the $1/month (or whatever
it was) inside wiring option when I had initially subscribed, that
I would have to pay to have an technician come out to the apartment
to figure out what was wrong. I contacted the apartment manager, but
they were very vague about whose responsibility the wiring was.
I pointed out that if it was my responsibility, then I'd feel
no reluctance to rip out sheet rock to get at the defective
wiring. They then informed me that they would talk to the telco,
and when I went home from work the next day, the dial tone was on.
Which leads me to this suggestion. When you first make arrangements
to get a line, go for the inside wiring service option. Once the
line is working satisfactorily, then drop the service. It seems to
me that usually most problems occur on startup - and once things
get going, they usually stay on. Thus, unless you are SURE the
apartment is going to take responsibility for the wiring, it would
be cheap insurance (for a buck or so, for one month) to make sure
that things will work when plugged together. Especially when you
consider you will have already paid $75 or so for someone at the
central office to flip a switch.
-Bob Wier at Flagstaff, Arizona Northern Arizona University
College of Engineering *usual disclaimers*
NAU Box 15600 ...arizona!naucse!rwi
Flagstaff, Az. BITNET: WIER@NAUVAX
86011 602-523-2052
(note: Bitnet node NAUVAX may not be
known yet to all stations)
College Motto: "The highest level of engineering in the Southwest
(7,000 feet)"smh@mhuxu.UUCP (S. M. Henning) (11/15/88)
In article <1032@naucse.UUCP>, (Robert Wier) writes: > When you first make arrangements to get a line, go for the inside > wiring service option. Once the line is working satisfactorily, > then drop the service. It seems to me that usually most problems > occur on startup - and once things get going, they usually stay on. The author wanted to save $1 per month and risk no phone service. My experience has been that about once per year my phone service gets knocked out by a lightning storm. About half the time the problem is in my house. When it is in my house it is where the telephone wire runs close to a large metal object like a pipe, tank, heating duct or some other piece of metal. The lightning actually jumps to the metal object and the wire in my house is left hollowed out where the copper should be. I have solved this problem by having the Telco bring the wire to a point near an outside stone wall. There is no metal near it. There is an interface block which I can plug a telephone into to test the incoming line, the part the Telco is responsible for. Then at this point I have an electronic surge protector with a fuse which protects the surge protector. The fuse blows out about once every other year. Now, every other year I have to replace a fuse rather than replace wire inside a wall. If you are in an area that has a lot of lightning and the telephone wiring has not been in and reliable for several years, pay the $1 per month. It is good insurance. If you are in an area where there is no lightning and you telephone wiring has been in for many years and is very reliable, then the $1 per month may be only for peace of mind and nothing more. **** Lang May Your Lum Reek **** Steve Henning, AT&T Bell Labs, Reading, PA UUCP: att!mhuxu!smh
gast@lanai.cs.ucla.edu (David Gast) (11/16/88)
In article <1032@naucse.UUCP> rwi@naucse.UUCP (Robert Wier) writes: > > Recently, when I moved to an apartment due to a new job, I made > arrangements to have a (single party, residential) phone line > connected. I did this from out-of-state by calling the business > office in the area code where I now reside. When I finally > arrived at my apartment about 3 weeks later, I plugged in my > phone, and guess what? No dial tone. I called repair, and they > informed me that since I had turned down the $1/month (or whatever > it was) inside wiring option when I had initially subscribed, that > I would have to pay to have an technician come out to the apartment > to figure out what was wrong. When I got my phone service in LA, I was told that the telephone company will make sure that the line is working properly when connected regardless of whether inside wiring is accepted. > Which leads me to this suggestion. When you first make arrangements > to get a line, go for the inside wiring service option. Once the > line is working satisfactorily, then drop the service. Depending on your phone company and your puc, this may not be such a good idea. At least in the GTE service area in which I live, it costs $26.00 for a change like the one suggested above. David Gast gast@cs.ucla.edu {uunet,ucbvax,rutgers}!{ucla-cs,cs.ucla.edu}!gast
maslak@unix.SRI.COM (Valerie Maslak) (11/18/88)
Robert, In the law, there is something called the warrant of merchantibility, which means that someone who offers something for sale is selling you what they say they're selling you. The phone folks were selling you an operating phone line, I would think, so if you get there and use the line for the first time and it doesn't work, it's their problem, not yours: they have to make the line work on THEIR money. Later, after it's worked right the first time, then it's your problem for repairs if the house wiring is at fault. Don't let them hassle you. Stand up for your rights as a consumer. The line has to work right to begin with, at least. Valerie Maslak
smh@mhuxu.UUCP (S. M. Henning) (11/18/88)
In article <24447@sri-unix.SRI.COM>, (Valerie Maslak) writes: > > ... the warrant of merchantibility ... The phone folks > were selling you an operating phone line, I would think, > so if you get there and use the line for the first time and > it doesn't work, it's their problem, not yours: they have to make > the line work on THEIR money. Later, after it's worked right > the first time, then it's your problem for repairs if the > house wiring is at fault. Don't let them hassle you. The phone company is providing an operating phone line. If you hook a phone to the end of their line and their line is defective they have to come out and repair it at their expense. However, what they were trying to tell the original poster was that if they come out and their line is OK and the wiring in the apartment house was at fault, then they don't repair it and you have to pay for the service call. Therefore, in today's telephone environment, you need a way to tell if your incoming telephone line is at fault or if the fault is in the wiring on your premises. I personally believe that a $1 a month is good insurance for most people who don't want to be bothered. The phone company is legally prevented from fixing your wiring. Now if you lease the wiring from them, then they will maintain it. Weren't things much simpler when we had Ma Bell? **** Lang May Your Lum Reek **** Steve Henning, AT&T Bell Labs, Reading, PA UUCP: att!mhuxu!smh
ars@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Andy Soravilla) (11/19/88)
In article <1032@naucse.UUCP>, rwi@naucse.UUCP (Robert Wier) writes: > > arrived at my apartment about 3 weeks later, I plugged in my > phone, and guess what? No dial tone. I called repair, and they > informed me that since I had turned down the $1/month (or whatever > it was) inside wiring option when I had initially subscribed, that > I would have to pay to have an technician come out to the apartment > to figure out what was wrong. I contacted the apartment manager, but > > Which leads me to this suggestion. When you first make arrangements > to get a line, go for the inside wiring service option. Once the > line is working satisfactorily, then drop the service. It seems to > me that usually most problems occur on startup - and once things I think you got some wrong information or you misunderstood the person you talked to at repair service. The $1/month (or 50 cents/ month for residence service) is to service/repair your IW after the service is in and WORKING. In your case the service was never working, so you would pay going labor rates for an installer to be dispatched to INSTALL the service. In most Apt buildings the building owner will be responsible for the IW, but thats between you and the apt people. The price you were quoted for installation was to have dial tone at the interface ( the point where RBOC responsibility ends) usually in apts it's at a closet in the building. If it is necessary to dispatch an installer to get dial tone to that point there is no charge, but beyond that is usually charged at 1/4 hour increments. If the building is new it is more than likely the fault of the contractor who installed the IW. I'm sorry if it is getting verbose, maybe you should call back to the RBOC and ask for some clarification. I'm from Pacific*Bell in California and that is how we do it out here. I would assume ( I know what assuming can cost me) that it is handled approx. the same for most RBOCS. andy pacbell!pbhya!ars
dave@westmark.UUCP (Dave Levenson) (11/19/88)
In article <24447@sri-unix.SRI.COM>, maslak@unix.SRI.COM (Valerie Maslak) writes: ... > In the law, there is something called the warrant of > merchantibility, which means that someone who offers something for sale > is selling you what they say they're selling you. The phone folks > were selling you an operating phone line, I would think, > so if you get there and use the line for the first time and > it doesn't work, it's their problem, not yours: ... .. > Valerie Maslak No, Valerie, the phone company sells you a network access line. If they can deliver dial tone to the network interface, they've done exactly what they've offered to. If the power company delivers the appropriate amount of electricity to your service entrance, they've done the same. If your house wiring is faulty, it's not the fault of the utility. If you want to, you can hire an electrician to correct your house wiring -- telephone or electric. What Robert is recommending is that one should accept the Telco's offer of providing the services of their own electricians, at a rate that is probably less than he'd pay for any other electrician. If the rate is only $1 per month, it's probably a good idea. Here in NJ, it is more expensive. Where I live, my inside telephone wiring is easily accessible in my unfinished basement, and I choose not to pay for services I do not require. Robert does not tell us what problem was corrected. If the trouble was on the Telco side of the Network Interface, then the Telco was obligated to fix it, whether or not he paid for the optional inside wire maintenance service. If the trouble was on the customer side of the Network Interface, then he (or his landlord) was so obligated. Either way, it's nice to have the choice. -- Dave Levenson Westmark, Inc. The Man in the Mooney Warren, NJ USA {rutgers | att}!westmark!dave
brian@cbw1.UUCP (Brian Cuthie) (11/21/88)
In article <24447@sri-unix.SRI.COM> maslak@unix.sri.com (Valerie Maslak) writes: >Robert, > >In the law, there is something called the warrant[y] of >merchantibility, which means that someone who offers something for sale >is selling you what they say they're selling you. The phone folks >were selling you an operating phone line, I would think, >so if you get there and use the line for the first time and >it doesn't work, it's their problem, not yours: they have to make >the line work on THEIR money. Later, after it's worked right >the first time, then it's your problem for repairs if the >house wiring is at fault. Don't let them hassle you. >Stand up for your rights as a consumer. The line has to work right >to begin with, at least. > >Valerie Maslak I'm not sure that in this case this is entirely true. If the inside wiring is owned by you, then the telco only has to provide dial-tone to your premisses' interface. They almost always supply a little box that has a modular jack and some scary label that says something to the effect of "don's screw around inside this box." This modular termination is provided for the explicit purpose of allowing you to unplug you premisses wiring and plug in a known working instrument. If you get dial-tone, it's your problem. If you don't, it's their's. The telco is under no obligation to provide any warranty for your local wiring *if* you own it and have not elected for some additional inside wiring maintenance plan. -brian -- Brian D. Cuthie uunet!umbc3!cbw1!brian Columbia, MD brian@umbc3.umd.edu
maslak@unix.SRI.COM (Valerie Maslak) (11/23/88)
How can this person, who has never lived in this apartment, be liable for the operability of the building's phone lines??? The money I pay every month is for the MAINTENANCE of the lines. But they sure as shootin had them operating right to begin with. If it's not the phone company's problem (which I think it is), then it's the landlord's problem. It's sure not his! Valerie Maslak
ejnihill@sactoh0.UUCP (Eric J. Nihill) (11/24/88)
In article <24635@sri-unix.SRI.COM>, maslak@unix.SRI.COM (Valerie Maslak) writes: > How can this person, who has never lived in this apartment, > be liable for the operability of the building's phone lines??? > > The money I pay every month is for the MAINTENANCE > of the lines. But they sure as shootin had them operating > right to begin with. > If it's not the phone company's problem (which I think it is), > then it's the landlord's problem. It's sure not his! > > Valerie Maslak Under the new "Judge Greene" phone company rules, the inside wiring is not the local Telco problem. Consider it like your electricity. The Telco will make it good to the interface point ( their fuse box ) and from there on, it is your problem. Who would be responsible if one of your AC wall oulets went bad? Most major Power companys will come in to your house and maintain/fix your inside wiring for your electricity. But you will pay. You can subscribe to a maintainance plan from your local Telco in most areas ( except here, they don't want it! Roseville Telco) and they will maintain the inside wires for the length of the contract. Once you move out, they will no longer maintain the wires unless the new subscriber so desires. All this seems to be the result of the late 60's and 70's era when it was fashionable to mount crusades against major Corporations in order to take some of their control away and put it back in the hands of the people. But, with the control, came the responsibility. True, you can now buy a phone anywhere you like (just like a lamp), you can now install as many outlets as you like ( just like AC outlets ), and if it goes bad inside the house, it's your problem (just like the AC outlets). Trying to explain this to cost cutting landlord may be another story. Maybe even a title to a book!:-) Good-luck; Eric P.S. Yes, I am slightly biased. I worked as a Telco repairman in the 60's-70's and use to continually hear complaints about how big the Company was, what a monopoly it was, and how anyone should be able to run their own wires and buy their own phones. -- =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= | In God We Trust, || ...pacbell!sactoh0!ejnihill | | All Others Pay Cash. || Flick Lives! | -_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-
jlw@lznv.ATT.COM (J.L.WOOD) (11/24/88)
I think that there can be no question that in a rental property that the responsibility for inside telephone wiring is with the landlord. Pretty much universally (your state may, but probably doesn't, differ) all permanent changes, alterations, improvements, and repairs to the leasehold become the property of the property owner. This includes such trivialities as curtain rods, towel bars, etc. Also a paint job, but if the landlord doesn't think that the color or quality of workmanship is to his liking, he can make you pay for a repaint job, or other repair becomes his. There is a fairly famous case in which a tenant farmer made significant improvements to the quality of the soil of a farm and repaired the farmhouse and fixed up and added outbuildings and barns. The property owner then raised the farmer's rent with the next lease to the point where the tenant farmer couldn't afford the farm any more. The only thing he was allowed to do was to take the portable equipment he actually owned plus his livestock. If he'd destroyed or damaged any of the buildings he had worked on, it would have been considered malicious vandalism. Getting back to telco wiring. Given the above then the inside wiring must be either the landlord's responsibility or under contract to the telco by the landlord. I cannot see a landlord doing the latter. Just my opinion. Joe Wood jlw@lznv.ATT.COM
sama@mtuxo.att.com (XMRH6-S.ANZELOWITZ) (12/01/88)
In article <1509@lznv.ATT.COM>, jlw@lznv.ATT.COM (J.L.WOOD) writes: > > I think that there can be no question that in a rental property that the > responsibility for inside telephone wiring is with the landlord. > Pretty much universally (your state may, but probably doesn't, differ) > all permanent changes, alterations, improvements, and repairs to the > leasehold become the property of the property owner. > > ...Given the above then the inside wiring > must be either the landlord's responsibility or under contract to the telco > by the landlord. I cannot see a landlord doing the latter. > > In response to some of the statements currently on the net involving inside wiring and tenants and landlords, I thought I'd share the following. We own and manage a rental property which we purchased new, and without benefit of telephone wiring. That's what happens nowadays when builders decide not to pay the extra money (to the phone company) to have phone wires installed while the building is being built. Realizing this, and prior to the first tenant taking occupancy, I decided to install the wires (and jacks) myself. Trying to make sure that sufficient jacks were available to the tenants, I installed them in the kitchen, livingroom, bedrooms, and even one in the garage. Since the walls were already up, it was tough going. Fortunately, I was able to utilize an otherwise unused 4" pvc conduit for one of the two main entrance wire. Several tenants later, we got a call from our tenant who advised us that only one of his phones was working, and that the phone company told him that the entrance wire was shorted-out and grounded. Rather than pay the phone company to fix it, I decided to do it myself. After some tracing, I found that the "problem" was inside the pvc conduit. It ran from the garage to a utility room - a distance of about 25 feet. After originally placing the telephone wire into it, which by the way was the ONLY thing in it, I had cemented the garage end of it closed. This, to prevent drafts, etc., as well as to protect the phone wires. It took me about a half hour of pounding with a hammer and chisels to break-up the concrete and free up that end of the wire. The plan was to then attach a new wire to it, and use the old wire to pull the new wire through the conduit. No big deal. I attached the new wire to the garage-end of the old wire, and with the assistance of my tenant's son, fed the new wire into the conduit while he pulled the old, and new wires in from the inside. We then found the "problem". Approximately two feet into the conduit from the utility room end, and still attached to the telephone wires, was my tenant's son's "missing" gerbel. YUK! Being on the inside (the pulling end of the wire), his son was the first to come across it. Lucky me! And he was the first to recognize this brown fur ball with its teeth still clutching the phone wires as his missing gerbel. YUK! Phugh! By the way, our Lease specified: NO PETS. Evidently, it had tried to eat its way through the insullation and, my guess is, electrocuted himself. Double YUK! After my tenant's son removed his former pet, we found that this industrious gerbel had moved about five pounds of dog food (from the dog's dish) into the conduit. He was evidently going to set up housekeeping in there. Again, you'll remember, the lease specified NO PETS. It then took me another hour to clean the dog food out of the conduit and about ten minutes to splice in the new phone wire. All of his phones then worked again. Landlords have almost always gotten a bad name. And while I'm not going to try to defend them all, I will say that we, at least, have always treated our tenants with respect, have always afforded them with the benefit of the doubt, and have always tried to provide them with the best possible accomodations we could afford. And to "stick" landlords with the responsibility for everything that goes "wrong" inside a property, and as it seems on the net now, for all inside wiring problems, is unfair. The phone companies don't charge much for maintaining this wiring for a reason: It doesn't require much. In fact, it generally costs the phone company about $75 to send a repairman out to your home. So at the approximately $1.25 per month they charge for this, you can calculate that they expect to have to do this only once in about six years on average. Consider this: 1) If this tenant had elected to pay the phone company for this inside wiring maintenance, it would have cost him all of about $15 for the year. Big deal. 2) At one time or another in our lifetimes, EVERYONE needs to rent a place to live in. Yet, few if any tenants are willing to cut a landlord an even break. Think about it. Without the landlords, where would we all live? Me too. Although we own our own home, we often find ouselves as tenants; for example when we rent a ski condo for a week of vacation at our favorite ski area. 3) Would you expect the landlord to pay for the installation of your cable TV as well? And NO, this doesn't make the property more "valuable" in terms of future rent. I believe we have to apply at least some degree of logic and consideration before assigning all such "responsibility" to the landlord. In the case of our tenant, I charged him about $35 to fix the phone wires. Cooley wages! Anyone care to comment? After some of our past tenants, I've become somewhat flame-proof.(:-( ______ _______ _____ _______ ------- Sam Anzelowitz / __ \ <__ __> / __ \ <__ __> -====------ mtuxo!sama | (__) | | | \ \ \_\ | | -======------ AT&T Bell Laboratories | __ | | | / _) __ | | --====------- Rm 1E316; (201)576-6222 | | | | | | ( (__/ / | | ----------- 307 Middletown-Lincroft Rd |_| |_| |_| \_____/ |_| ------- Lincroft, N.J. 07738
jlw@lznv.ATT.COM (J.L.WOOD) (12/06/88)
In article <3557@mtuxo.att.com>, sama@mtuxo.att.com (XMRH6-S.ANZELOWITZ) writes: : In article <1509@lznv.ATT.COM>, jlw@lznv.ATT.COM (J.L.WOOD) writes: : > : > I think that there can be no question that in a rental property that the : > responsibility for inside telephone wiring is with the landlord. : : In response to some of the statements currently on the net involving : inside wiring and tenants and landlords, I thought I'd share the following. : : We own and manage a rental property which we purchased new, and without : benefit of telephone wiring. That's what happens nowadays when : builders decide not to pay the extra money (to the phone company) to : have phone wires installed while the building is being built. Realizing : this, and prior to the first tenant taking occupancy, I decided to : install the wires (and jacks) myself. Trying to make sure that : sufficient jacks were available to the tenants, I installed them in the : kitchen, livingroom, bedrooms, and even one in the garage. Since the : walls were already up, it was tough going. Fortunately, I was able to : utilize an otherwise unused 4" pvc conduit for one of the two main : entrance wire. : We then found the "problem". Approximately two feet into the conduit from the : utility room end, and still attached to the telephone wires, was my : tenant's son's "missing" gerbel. : By the way, our Lease specified: NO PETS. You were able to get some recompense from the tenant because the tenant voilated the covenants of your lease, voluntarily entered in to. If on the other hand you'd found a dead mouse or rat in the conduit, you'd have been stuck. Joe Wood jlw@lanv.ATT.COM