Residents and home internet providers. Residents' view


Please do not judge strictly, because I have not written completed texts for a long time.

Eldar's article a bit

touched on my pain about communicating with management companies (UK) and neighbors. I share, I hope, systematically and sometimes with examples.

The main idea of ​​the planned changes in the laws istelecom is powerless, telecom is oppressed. And not even users, but their representatives represented by the Criminal Code when companies try to give a cheap, alternative, reliable, high-speed, etc. Internet subscribers.

Most people living in Moscow and the Moscow region livein apartment buildings and even own apartments. At the same time, there are no alternative resource-supplying organizations in the house for water, electricity, gas, and sometimes television and telephone. The equipment of these companies occupies our apartments and landings, and no one usually resents clogged cable channels for new wiring. And dissatisfaction with the services most often pours only on the management company in case of non-delivery of water, the required temperature, lack of electricity or a non-working antenna.

The situation changes when the discussion of Internet operators begins. Let's start with new buildings.

In commercial (not built by order of the cityor the state) in houses, usually the management companies are appointed by the developer, and it is rarely possible to change them. Of course, all meetings required by law are held, decisions are made, and the majority of owners agree to a generally accepted document. This applies to both garbage collection and access to Internet providers (not very, in the light of the new course on language cleansing, a good word, but provide is “provide” from English, and they didn’t come up with the best translation, they just began to use the sound of the word) . Internet communications are not quite a core business for developers, it seems to me, but if it is possible to receive money immediately after building a house for a service that is needed by almost all apartment buyers, then why not do this. Therefore, the developer, most often at the stage of buying land for construction, plans and builds the necessary sewer wells not only for water, electricity and gas, but also for low-current communications. The developer spends funds, freezes them for 2-4 years, while building houses and selling apartments. And at the stage when the apartment owners find themselves in their possessions, he proposes to vote and allow the affiliated provider to officially occupy the common house property and provide services in the house to residents.

For example, in the Brigantina residential complex (LC) in Dolgoprudny, the developer is Granel Group of Companies, the GranelZhKH management company, and the GranLine provider.


Everything went along the knurled path, but the inhabitants,fearing that, as always, the developer or the management company would not let alternative providers in, they voted against the presence of "Granline" in the houses. It would seem that the specified developer and management company should urgently offer alternatives in the form of eminent providers, put them into the constructed wells for free, so that residents can choose. But it turned out differently - it turned out to be an appeal to the city from the side of the Criminal Code that "Granline" provides infrastructure critical for the functioning of houses and therefore must continue to work without an alternative. And to eliminate digital inequality in rights, two more companies were admitted - Summit Telecom and ITES Connect, but, judging by the chats of Brigantina, they are connected with Granline. At the same time, any other telecom operator receives technical conditions for connecting to the house, but so far not one of them in houses (and there are 6 of them and two more 600+ apartments are being prepared) has found economic feasibility to work in houses. At first, there were talks that as soon as more than 2/3 of the houses were occupied, they would immediately enter, but now, according to GranelZhKH, the finishing of no more than 100 apartments in each house is being completed, that is, about 5/6 are already living, and there are no local, Dolgoprudny, or federal providers in the houses.


Affiliate material

Reality and prospects of the IT professions market

What professions are the most popular and highly paid?

Saturday coffee #237

Pour a cup of invigorating Saturday coffee andcheck out the news of the week. SberDevices introduced two smart speakers, Samsung showed the Galaxy S23, a beautiful liftback arrived in Russia, and Jony Ive released his first product after leaving Apple…

Mitsubishi ASX test. in a new wrapper

The new crossover Mitsubishi ASX, introduced in 2019, despite the changed appearance, in fact, is…

Workshop. We repair AC Robin Mist headset

The main problem in repairing TWS headsets and headphones is that few people undertake the repair of such equipment. But we are not one of those, so we boldly take on repairs, gain experience and learn something new.

Another example - LCD "Star of Russia", Sovkhoznaya streetin Khimki, houses 3-9 (I don’t know about the rest, they were built later). Here the story is more complicated, since the first two developers were unable to build houses and completed the construction of PIK, although they could not or did not want to appoint their affiliated management company, Peak Region. Initially, the Management Company "Modern Service Technologies, ST-Service" worked in the houses since 2011. It did not provide Internet services, but there were no providers for the first three years, except for "Telinkom". I can’t say anything particularly bad, everything worked, which was necessary 10 years ago.

"Star of Russia"

And in 2017, there were already several different providers in the house, even eminent ones, Beeline, Rostelecom ...

Khimki. Sovkhoznaya street, house 9, 25th floor of a two-entrance building. 11 apartments per floor, only two cable channels. 2017

And on the last, 25th floor, despite suchwide cable channels, weaving of webs between power and low-current began. Not to mention the fact that it is useless to run a twisted pair cable along power cables. There were complaints to the Criminal Code about the elimination of this, there were no changes. But thanks to the very active elected chairman of the board of the house Alexander Beketov, house 9, having passed into the management Municipal Unitary Enterprise Zhilischnik (Khimki), could get better by spring 2019:

Khimki. Sovkhoznaya street, house 9, 25th floor. 2019 year.

As far as they could, they did better, and that's justcommon areas. They also managed to influence the situation in the attics of the house, but, alas, I did not take pictures of these outrages myself, so it would be dishonest to share. I'm sure if there are responses from the residents, they will correct me. I may be wrong, but the ISP, which is on the user's side, has contributed the most to the confusion on the technical floor.

But municipal houses are not far behind in complexity, where residents have evolved to become owners of apartments in which they have lived since Soviet times.

Korneichuk street, GBU "Zhilischnik Bibirevo"". House built in 1976.

Soviet times, then the cable channels were not occupied by either intercoms or the Internet. Just a phone and a TV with a radio. View from house 48 on the street. Korneychuk

Everything was evolutionary, in the Soviet way.Everything is common, everything is mine. A long time ago, when the Internet was modem, and ICQ was massive and 7-8-digit, the neighbors in the houses decided to create their own KorNET intranet, which worked fine until 2014 and even gained access to the global network in the early 2000s, according to extracts from the Unified State Register of Legal Entities. Then it was taken over by Starlink. I sat down and, when I could, helped to throw air lines between the houses (overhead lines, at first even coaxial, then STP), they found lightning protection equipment, changed hubs and switches in an accident ... And the cable channel was occupied only by the twisted pair cable of the Kornet. Until the big providers pulled up and they began to run out of space.

Therefore, one fine summer day, after an incredible noise in the stairwell, I saw plumbing pipes running from the first to the last floor with fresh Corbina Telecom stickers.

Corbiny Telecom cable channel, Korneychuk street, 48

And no legally required general meetingsowners were not carried out. None of the owners of common shared property was asked for permission. They just drilled, stuck pipes and pasted advertising.

The Criminal Code, if it could react, then simply did notwould have had time. Everything was done literally in 3-4 hours, and the state management company usually serves hundreds of houses and would not have had time to react, especially since noisy work was not really regulated at that time, and it was carried out at a reasonable time.

I can’t get around the question and the Moscow projectrenovations. I live in Beskudnikovo and got into the first wave of the move. The houses were built new, interesting. Compared to the 5-storey buildings of 1964, the buildings were much more welcoming to a large number of electronic communications. The developer - LSR, was physically built by some of their contractors.

House in 2018, the moment of settlement. Beskudnikovsky boulevard, 11, building 1

House in 2023, shabby, faded, graffiti on the upper floors.

The house is monolithic, like the first two examples in mineopus. There are many cable channels, 5 per floor, they are wide, and this is with 5 apartments per floor. Initially, MGTS + providers Degunino.net and Seven Sky were laid in the house. Beeline, MTS, Rostelecom, UCA Networks, Starlink, OnLime and others gradually pulled up.

It turned out that I could not figure out whichproviders and on the basis of what they ended up in our house. Surprisingly, Beeline fully answered, there was a written response that services have been provided since 2019 under an agreement with the Criminal Code, and the Criminal Code replied that Beeline was in the house before the general meeting of owners due to the fact that the owners the house was less than two-thirds. Despite the fact that this is a half-truth, the house belonged to the Department of City Property apartment by apartment and was transferred to new owners by apartment, that is, at any time the premises had a precisely defined owner who had the opportunity to vote for the use of common house property, and as a result - at the time of signing the contract management of an apartment building, it would be possible to know what communications are in the house, who is allowed, except for the owners and emergency services, to enter the house and how, for example, the Criminal Code is notified about this.


As an advertisement

Robot vacuum cleaner 360 Botslab P7

Budget robot vacuum cleaner with voice control, the ability to build room maps and an operating time of up to 90 minutes, as well as wet cleaning.


Flagships from Samsung - S23 line, as well as an updated line of laptops

Check out Galaxy S23/S23+/S23 Ultra, new OneUI features and more; updated line of laptops; prospects in Russia.

What to watch in February: 2 films and 4 series

A most pleasant February, pleasing with interesting films and series. The case when everyone will find something to their liking.

Experience with Apple iPhone 14 Pro Max

Another look at Apple's flagship smartphone: dynamic island, AOD, remote banking apps and more...

By the time of the move, I seem to have approachedcrisis age and began to demand copies of all documents signed by me in solid form. In accordance with the contract for the management of an apartment building between me and the management company GBU Zhilischnik, Beskudnikovsky district there were no communications in the house at the beginning of February 2019 at all.

The first version of the agreement, signed by residents in 2019. There is at least a semblance of what should be described in the section.

The second version of the contract was sent via the EDO of the city of Moscow. Here the number of pointers has changed, but there is still no other equipment.

The third version of the treaty, now onportal dom.mos.ru dedicated to the house. It is empty and is still considered signed by Z.M. Zhamanov in 2020, although residents signed an agreement with the previous director M.A. Stolbov. In general, the document is empty.

The answer of the District Administration to the question - how soit turned out that the owners do not know about the providers. At the same time, the tripartite act of connecting a stationary object does not indicate with whom it was concluded. But, most likely, between the energy sales company, GBU Zhilischnik and Soyuzpechat. The owners of the house only know about this wire that this cable hangs with a cable and sometimes sparks in the rain.

From the answer of the owner of the line hanging from our houseto the neighboring one through the territory of the kindergarten since 2018. I specify the year in order to note that at that moment the house was not inhabited, and the Moscow City Property Department was the sole owner, and he, obviously, signed a permit for the installation of the line in conditions when the mayor of the city forbade the installation of overhead lines and all conduct along cable ducts. But in the house management contract, this load on the house is not indicated.

No ISPs, no SkyNet overhead line, noelectric cable from the roof to the Soyuzpechat kiosk at the bus stop. Moreover, there were strange artifacts in the form of gas valves, the absence of elevator shafts and the elevators themselves. I describe all this in such detail, since this is part of the city-wide home management services, which are supported by the Portal of the Mayor of the City and the portal of the State Services of the Russian Federation. What is good, they react to my comments in electronic appeals, change the composition of common house property in the appendix to the contract and post versions on the ed.mos.ru portal. What is bad - in 2019, all 352 apartments signed a house management agreement in paper form. I have a copy. And no one except me, most likely, knows that the contract was repeatedly embroidered, reassembled and re-sewn. 351 The owner or responsible tenant is not aware of the change in the contract. And the fact that it is posted on the portals does not matter - we signed the paper, the paper has changed, which means that we must offer to come up and sign the modified version or convene a meeting of owners on the initiative of the Criminal Code and approve the changes so that at least 2/3 knows about them. And the history of changes to the contract is also not in the public domain.

Back to communications.For the first year, we did not need to submit data to Mosenergosbyt on electricity consumption - the house was equipped with ASKUE and transmitted this data centrally to the management company. The same could be done with water - all meters are networked and transmit up-to-date data. However, this was not the case with water; information on water was transmitted on paper, by telephone and electronically.

After the transfer of contracts to Mosenergosbyt, convenienceceased (as in the previously mentioned "Brigantine", and in the "Star of Russia") - Mosenergosbyt does not use the systems at home (does not trust?) And forces monthly hands to enter data up to the 26th (and somewhere up to the 23rd), although We have already paid for the convenience of centralization.

By the way, it turned out that the Criminal Code does not represent andthe composition of the equipment that was clearly on the house at the time of transfer to management and settlement, which belonged to the city. For example, cameras with which clarification has been going on for the third year. In our house, there were lost (this is the most accurate word, because it is not clear who to blame) CCTV cameras (Beward), which have been standing since the house was put into operation, and since there are two more houses nearby with exactly the same and working cameras, I can only guess about the reasons for the loss of equipment, about which none of the residents had time to ask.

Entrance of the house in the spring of 2019. Not very good, but cameras are visible

Winter 2021-2022. There are no cameras, I had to personally put dummies, but since it is very clear that these are not cameras, they had no effect, and the doors continued to collapse

There are no cameras or dummies. Winter 2022-2023. There are no transparent door elements at all

As a result, we have been destroyedentrance doors in the entrances were vandalized, which were not ideal, but, as Sergey Semenovich promised, they were transparent, giving light savings in the daytime and a feeling of safe entry and exit at any time. Now our doors are blank. And after several iterations, the Safe City cameras were able to appear without the OSS, although at first we were told that this was necessary.

Moscow Housing Inspectoratecommon house property is sent to the dom.mos.ru portal, where you can find out everything about the house, although Muscovites can see this on both dom.mos.ru and ed.mos.ru, where you can also conduct OSS. But in our house it is impossible to see anything on the federal portal - there is no data about me from Zhilischnik, although everything is available from Rosreestr and the Ministry of Internal Affairs.

So residents have to find out on dubiouswebsites, which providers are in the house, or collect a collection of flyers, although by law the provider in the house cannot be without the decision of the owners. The same decision may be that access is free for the provider, and the contract for access to the house must be concluded with the Criminal Code for security control. Even if the contract is not free, it certainly cannot cost more than the smallest tariff for the end user. So, if such a tariff is about 500 rubles, and there are 10 providers in the house, then every month the house (its owners) receive 5,000 rubles in the form of compensation for the use of their property. As I wrote at the beginning - this may not be very fair to monopolists in the form of Mosenergosbyt and Mosvodokanal, who received access for free, but, on the other hand, they cannot change tariffs at any time, unlike providers who can just calculate and understand that supporting 1-2 users in the house is economically unprofitable, and even pay the Criminal Code for an agreement that is not concluded on behalf of the owners, and leave.

I'm not sure what for the MC who serve on100-200 houses, receiving from 10 providers in each of these 400-500 rubles in Moscow, this is a lot of money. But in the case described, the Criminal Code receives this money out of thin air, without conducting the OSS, without signing an agreement with us on the use of our property. It is economically dishonest forcing providers to essentially violate economic laws by paying not to the landlord, but to some company that has not received the right to do so.

After all, it costs nothing to represent the house as an objectinfrastructure that can accommodate a certain amount of cables, carry a certain wind load, share power with additional consumers, as is done, for example, by infrastructure tower companies. There, technical conditions for accommodation are issued to all who request it. It is not always possible to fulfill them, this is a fact. Someone may not have enough power, somewhere they need to strengthen the tower, or use lighter equipment, or even offer replacement equipment to one of the already deployed operators to fit within the allowed weight and dimensions at the required height. And then the operator decides whether it is profitable to strive for this tower or abandon the idea and find another solution.

Why is it that uncontrolled and non-transparent disorder is obtained in houses with state-owned management companies, while non-state ones are considered to monopolize the market, although there is more order in such management companies?

The provider must pay foruse of space in the house. But also to receive a completely transparent service for this - guaranteed cleaning after installation, clear instructions for accessing equipment, information about the change of ownership.
The MC should also be able, on behalf ofresidents to conclude such agreements (in fact, this is possible based on the results of the OSS), but is obliged to inform openly on the portals of the city, at home or on their own about contracts, costs and spending, and possibly about each visit of an employee of a company for access to equipment .
Residents / owners, of course, should knowabout all communications in the house, to be able to influence providers in terms of systematizing space in cable channels, to spend part of the funds (if they decide to take money for access to the house) for common house needs - landscaping, general video surveillance, barriers, and simply for the purchase of doors for common places use to replace those damaged by vandals.

The text turned out to be long because it bears my painas an employee of the provider, as well as the owner of the apartment and the chairman of the Council of the house. And each of the entities of both the Criminal Code and the executive authorities are playing football from one door to another, despite the fact that all the barriers are completely man-made and often superfluous.

Home Internet and the monopoly of management companies. One home - one provider!

Monopoly on home internet from a single provider in apartment buildings is coming to an end - a bill that will give everyone equal access and lower prices.