CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
Junior Member
Junior Member
Profile
Posts: 39
PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 5:44 pm
 


Tenants (renters) are not allowed to have many rights by default of lacking power of 'ownership'. BUT, did you know that any renter here (at least in Saskatchewan) have no right of privacy to an extreme? Also, we are held liable to any utilities while simultaneously being disempowered to prevent the owners from accessing these for themselves on our debt AND interrupt these services.

The law supposedly asserts some of these behaviors as "illegal" but cannot actually be challenged because the tenant complaining must go through processes that defeat the capacity of them to succeed regardless for many technical reasons.

Communication Utilities
If the company connects lines to a privately owned apartment dwelling, all lines between the outside connection and the internal 'suites' of the tenants are considered legally only of the power of the owner. As such, for instance, if you have your lines cut, tapped, or being used BY the owner in some discrete way, there is nothing the tenant can do YET are still independently LIABLE for the costs to those utilities IN LAW.

I discovered this here in Saskatchewan a few years ago when I had SaskTel services that was all of a sudden cut one day. Upon contacting the company, I was told that I'd require waiting a week for an appointment. I contacted the President of the company at the time and asked why I should not have had an emergency worker supplied given this service is essential, ...one reason why SaskTel was even justified as a Crown Corporation.

I was responded by the President at the time that only asserted that I should have been offered and emergency worker.....AT MY EXPENSE ($50 minimal). They justified this as MY problem because they informed me that the lines inside the building belong to the owner. So I contacted the owner but (reasonably I thought) was told that this was the responsibility of the utility company.

The gap between the outside access of the utility to the particular suite should belong to the company's liability when renters, not the owners, are required to pay the bill.

But the more problematic concern: given the owner has power between the outside utility and the tenant, the owner has unrestricted power to manage those links by ANY means if they are not held liable from neither outside utilities nor the tenant. This means they have a technical right to tap, use, or give access to others for any reason. This includes the police to be empowered to have access indirectly to appeal to the owner to interfere in ways that are illegal to all others (owners of homes, etc.)

If you don't care for recognizing this, let me broaden this logic to businesses within places like malls or those leasing building they are not direct owners of!!

We are already being discriminated as renters to freedoms of personal behaviors that are reversed if you go accross to the American border. For instance, we cannot place our own locks on our doors, have to enable potential access to the landlord and any of their permitted choice. They DO have to give a one day notice but can (and do) technically still go through your suite as long as they don't get caught. Police are NOT permitted to enter one's suites here (even if they hear suspicious behaviors going on from outside) BUT are enabled to access the privacy through one's communication lines given only the permission of the land owner regardless of any potential disruption of the tenant's rights.

For the poor, this is completely discriminating with utter disrespect but should be concerning for anyone who requires renting for any time.

I'd like others to pay attention to this and see if it affects them. I think if a utility company can transfer the responsibility of power to the owner of a building when the utility is liable and the owner is able to transfer the blame on the utility similarly, the tenant has no real power to avoid violation.

There is ONE potential exception which SHOULD be in favor of the tenant though: if the liability to the cost between the utility's responsibility ends AT THE BUILDING's OWNER, then we should have the right as tenants to pass the debts of our services to the owners legally as well. If not, there is a contradiction of laws.

I urge others to try this. If you are a tenant who desires not to pay the bill, the owner should be held liable for the same reason the utility passes their own responsibility onto the owner over the tenant paying the services. Businesses as tenants should be able to do this as well and I urge them to use this loophole to justify not paying their own utilities unless they are completely at protected right to hold the utility companies liable for their own option to transfer blame to the owners. The owners also have complete POWER to tap and use their tenant's lines because the utility company only legally holds the tenant liable to the bill!!


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 1044
PostPosted: Thu Jul 05, 2018 7:06 pm
 


Why do you think you're entitled to emergency phone reconnection service? It's essential?


Offline
Forum Junkie
Forum Junkie
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 559
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 5:27 am
 


ScottMayers wrote:
If not, there is a contradiction of laws.
I urge others to try this.
I urge nobody try this. The law does not matter.

Try defending yourself when your telephone is cut off and the telephone company sends your bills to the collection agency.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 7759
PostPosted: Sat Jul 07, 2018 10:34 am
 


I don't understand the gripe.
The line going into an apartment building, to the distribution box (demarc) is the telco's responsibility.
The line(s) from the demarc to your apartment are the apartment owners responsibility.
The jack in the apartment and the phone are yours.
Pretty clear, always been like that and I left that trade over 20 years ago.
There was no 24/7 service time guarantee even when it was a regulated industry, and YOU ALL wanted deregulation.
So stories of people calling in that all the telephone poles on the street were knocked down by a storm and being told by some idiot that "he tested the line and everything is fine, you'll have to pay to have someone look" are normal these days.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 26897
PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 5:45 am
 


Who has copper phone lines any more?? [huh]


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Toronto Maple Leafs
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3503
PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 9:38 am
 


DrCaleb wrote:
Who has copper phone lines any more?? [huh]


Old people, mainly.

Also, what does this have to do with Rights to Privacy or Protection?


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
 San Jose Sharks


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 58647
PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 9:40 am
 


DrCaleb wrote:
Who has copper phone lines any more?? [huh]


Even my 82yo mother-in-law is on a cell phone these days. Much more reliable especially in bad weather.


Offline
CKA Moderator
CKA Moderator
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 26897
PostPosted: Mon Jul 09, 2018 9:45 am
 


llama66 wrote:
DrCaleb wrote:
Who has copper phone lines any more?? [huh]


Old people, mainly.

Also, what does this have to do with Rights to Privacy or Protection?


Attachment:
hey wiretap.jpg
hey wiretap.jpg [ 43.62 KiB | Viewed 40 times ]


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 8 posts ] 



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.