Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Septic tank charges

Options
1…1011131516…35

Comments

  • Options
    #362
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,025 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    If fellas on here had any idea how much your typical shovel leaner is earning (especially when they get overtime/on call) then ye might be far more reluctant to see local authority taxes and rates coming in

    Its funny that the majority of water breaks in my area seem to happen on a Saturday - or at least the repair does


  • Options
    #363
    Welease
    Registered Users Posts: 3,834 ✭✭✭Welease


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    Yup. In Denmark, for example, every local authority levies its own income taxes on top of the national tax in order to pay for local services - but the richer local authorities still subsidise the poorer ones.

    Not that much different from the UK's Council Tax funding model i suppose (although the collection is different, but still somewhat based on "wealth")..

    There are various strategic iniatives funded by the government (major road networks etc.), but local based services (incl. bins, sewage, police, libraries, road upkeep, street lighting, sports facilities, schools, parking etc.) are paid for by the locals via council tax.. With the added benefit that councillors can be voted out if people disagree with how/where the money is used.

    If we were going to go to a similar model, if would be better if we upscaled to more than our current county councils. We probably have too many, and lose any potential economies of scale and gain duplication of administration.


  • Options
    #364
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Welease wrote: »
    If we were going to go to a similar model, if would be better if we upscaled to more than our current county councils. We probably have too many, and lose any potential economies of scale and gain duplication of administration.
    Indeed, our councils are relics of a time gone by. They should have been reformed/amalgamated years ago. TDs however are afraid of more powerful local democracy because it's easier to hide behind problems "up in Dublin" so to speak.

    This is why Leinster House destroyed Dublin County Council-it was getting too big for its boots and had to be culled. The correct course of action would have been to create a Greater Dublin Authority by merging the then Dublin County Council with Dublin City Council. We may then have avoided a lot of silly buggers at county boundaries.


  • Options
    #365
    Chipboard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 428 ✭✭Chipboard


    Welease wrote: »
    If its an environmental issue then why do not all mains sewerage systems also not require certification? The same amount of effluent will travel down those pipes, and they are equally prone to degration, settlement, movement etc..

    For clarity I should add.. I don't believe this is anything to do with the environment.. A council guy will come and stick his head in the tank and do sod all else.. This is a revenue generating scheme for the council nothing else.. I don't have any objections to paying extra tax, but this will be eaten up in inefficiencies and waste.. and will achieve little.

    This is very enlightened in light of today's revelation that half of the country's public waste water schemes do not meet national or EU standards.

    If rural dwellers who fitted their own septic tanks have to pay the tax and pay to fix the tank, why shouldn't city dwellers, who won't have to pay to fix the waste water treatment plants, have to pay the tax.

    I am going to get my tank checked as I will make sure that I am not responsible for polluting a water supply but I ain't registering or paying the tax unless everyone, city and country, has to do likewise.


  • Options
    #366
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Chipboard wrote: »
    If rural dwellers who fitted their own septic tanks have to pay the tax and pay to fix the tank, why shouldn't city dwellers, who won't have to pay to fix the waste water treatment plants, have to pay the tax.

    Grand we will. Will you top up the amount so that your County Council gets no subsidy from citydwellers?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #367
    Tipp Man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,025 ✭✭✭Tipp Man


    Chipboard wrote: »
    This is very enlightened in light of today's revelation that half of the country's public waste water schemes do not meet national or EU standards.

    If rural dwellers who fitted their own septic tanks have to pay the tax and pay to fix the tank, why shouldn't city dwellers, who won't have to pay to fix the waste water treatment plants, have to pay the tax.

    I am going to get my tank checked as I will make sure that I am not responsible for polluting a water supply but I ain't registering or paying the tax unless everyone, city and country, has to do likewise.

    Been saying that throughout this thread that the biggest polluters in this country are the county councils by not treating and not correctly treating urban sewage

    Of course the urban crowd don't want to hear it or accept it because as far as they are concerned when you flush your toilet your s''t magically changes into pure water

    Looks like everybody urban and rural will be paying a sewage charge from now on


  • Options
    #368
    Chipboard
    Closed Accounts Posts: 428 ✭✭Chipboard


    MadsL wrote: »
    Chipboard wrote: »
    If rural dwellers who fitted their own septic tanks have to pay the tax and pay to fix the tank, why shouldn't city dwellers, who won't have to pay to fix the waste water treatment plants, have to pay the tax.

    Grand we will. Will you top up the amount so that your County Council gets no subsidy from citydwellers?

    If there are problems with city as well as rural systems then there is no reason to believe that city dwellers will be subsidising fixing the rural systems - the city systems need to be fixed also.

    You produce waste don't you? Regardless of where the problems are do you not think you should pay the same as me unless, as Tippman says, yours turns to water!


  • Options
    #369
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Chipboard wrote: »
    You produce waste don't you? Regardless of where the problems are do you not think you should pay the same as me unless, as Tippman says, yours turns to water!
    No. People who live in conurbations should benefit from that. One of the benefits is economy of scale. It's cheaper to provide waste water treatment to a conurbation of 100k people than to 100k people on their own systems.


  • Options
    #370
    Welease
    Registered Users Posts: 3,834 ✭✭✭Welease


    murphaph wrote: »
    No. People who live in conurbations should benefit from that. One of the benefits is economy of scale. It's cheaper to provide waste water treatment to a conurbation of 100k people than to 100k people on their own systems.

    Absolutely, it should cost a fraction of the amount a septic tank etc costs per head..

    However the point still stands ;) If people are so gung-ho for septic tank owners to pick up the cost for their units (which they should btw!), then there should be little complaint if those who utilise public systems have to contribute to the upkeep of their respective systems..


  • Options
    #371
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    murphaph wrote: »
    Chipboard wrote: »
    You produce waste don't you? Regardless of where the problems are do you not think you should pay the same as me unless, as Tippman says, yours turns to water!
    No. People who live in conurbations should benefit from that. One of the benefits is economy of scale. It's cheaper to provide waste water treatment to a conurbation of 100k people than to 100k people on their own systems.

    Cheaper - yes.

    Free - no.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #372
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Cheaper - yes.

    Free - no.
    No, of course it can't be free. Someone has to pay.

    As I've said before, I'd be happy for local communes and larger towns and cities to levy their own taxes to provide local services and infrastructure, so long as they weren't also expected to subsidise the upkeep of non-national roads, power lines likely to be blown down at the first sign of a gale, Garda stations with 2 Guards and schools with 3 pupils etc. in sparsely populated areas. Sparsely populated areas should naturally have a dearth of services and infrastructure and densely populated areas should naturally have an abundance of them.

    People should be free to live in isolation (provided their dwellings are sympathetic to the natural environment in which they are built-not often the case in Ireland) however they should not expect the local road (which is of absolutely no importance to the country at large) on which their house stands to be maintained to anywhere near the same standards as in urban areas, nor should they expect to pay the same for electricity provision, given the extra costs incurred in maintaining rural electricity supplies: urban supplies can be undergrounded cost effectively and this ensures they won't blow down every winter. Electricity and telephone 8assuming fixed line) should cost more, (not just an extra fee for installation, it should cost more forever), road tax should be levied on fuel, so people who insist on living in isolation from the rest of us should pay for their extra pollution (as should urban dwellers who insist on driving instead of taking public transport).


  • Options
    #373
    ardmacha
    Registered Users Posts: 7,476 ✭✭✭ardmacha


    I also think that people should not receive higher rates of rent supplement in urban areas, subsidising wasters and absentee landlords in Germany.


  • Options
    #374
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,667 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    Perhaps as well rural dwellers can charge for a share of the tourist trade for the maintanence of the countryside and be exempt from "green" taxes due to a contribution to biodiversity and oxygen production.


  • Options
    #375
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    ardmacha wrote: »
    I also think that people should not receive higher rates of rent supplement in urban areas, subsidising wasters and absentee landlords in Germany.
    Think on before making what are obviously thinly veiled personal comments please....I provide a home for my tenants (my own former home which I lived in for 10 years, not some buy to let job, which your post would attempt to imply, I feel). They have an agreement with the state to provide them with RS. I have been a vocal about my support of reductions to RS and my desire to see RS further reduced for the good of the country, even if it means I lose out personally and even if it means I have to ultimately part ways with my tenants if it reaches a point where they cannot afford to live in an area that continues to experience relatively strong demand for housing.


  • Options
    #376
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Manach wrote: »
    Perhaps as well rural dwellers can charge for a share of the tourist trade for the maintanence of the countryside and be exempt from "green" taxes due to a contribution to biodiversity and oxygen production.
    To be quite frank, the explosion of one off housing has helped kill the once flourishing tourist trade in rural Ireland. They have killed the goose that was capable of laying the golden egg. Tourists coming to Ireland have a fixed impression in their minds: they are often deeply disappointed to find our patchwork of green fields, hedgerows and stone walls have been replaced in many places by suburbia with slightly more space between the houses.

    Far from maintaining the countryside, one off housing builders have ruined it to a very large degree. Go to England (one of the most densely populated countries on earth) and see how they manage their countryside and have managed to preserve the natural beauty of large swathes of it.

    Of course the usual cries coming from West of the Shannon in relation to diminishing tourist revenues tend to blame Failte Ireland for not marketing them enough. What's left to market though? The countryside has nothing to offer tourists once it's been carpeted in one off houses, absolutely nothing.


  • Options
    #377
    Sponge Bob
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 25,234 ✭✭✭✭Sponge Bob


    http://www.galwaynews.ie/24320-farmer-comes-clean-his-diy-septic-tank-%E2%80%93-buried-cortina
    Local politicians’ jaws dropped when they were told by the farmer from South Connemara that his ‘septic tank’ constituted an old Ford Cortina that he buried in the ground several years ago.

    The home owner is in a state of chassis over the prospect of being discovered by inspectors.

    He has told shocked TDs and councillors he can’t afford a replacement sewage treatment system and has sought their advice.

    The middle aged farmer, when building a new house more than two decades ago, decided to put an old Cortina to good use by digging a hole in the ground and lowering it into it.

    He removed all seats from inside the car and inserted the outflow pipe from the house in through the driver’s door window – then opened a rear window which he used for percolation purposes, before covering it all in.

    The man told stunned politicians that the system was working fine and he had no difficulties with it. He’s hoping for grant assistance to replace the buried car ... a proper filtration system could cost up to €17,000.


  • Options
    #378
    shedweller
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,029 ✭✭✭shedweller


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    http://www.galwaynews.ie/24320-farmer-comes-clean-his-diy-septic-tank-%E2%80%93-buried-cortina
    How prevalent is this? Numbers please. It strikes me as a bit "tabloidy" tbh.


  • Options
    #379
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    murphaph wrote: »
    Far from maintaining the countryside, one off housing builders have ruined it to a very large degree. Go to England (one of the most densely populated countries on earth) and see how they manage their countryside and have managed to preserve the natural beauty of large swathes of it.

    The UK is a disaster, because of their idiotic decision to ban one of houses they now have some of the smallest properties in the western world. They are THE WORST in the OECD - i.e among wider Europe, US, Canada, Australia & NZ etc.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8201900.stm

    They are forced to live on top of each other in cramped conditions. Self inflicted because of their law.

    You can protect sections of the countryside from one off housing such as national parks - and widen these if necessary. But Ireland has a large rural population and banning one off housing would be forcing another way of life upon people. We are not a dictatorship. If people have a problem with urban/rural tax distribution I suggest that imbalance be fixed instead.


  • Options
    #380
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    And how do we deal with the millions of cattle and millions of sheep pissing and ****ting all over the countryside?


  • Options
    #381
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Manach wrote: »
    Perhaps as well rural dwellers can charge for a share of the tourist trade for the maintanence of the countryside and be exempt from "green" taxes due to a contribution to biodiversity and oxygen production.


    I think that is the point of the septic tank inspections, we are trying to ensure that the countryside is 'maintained'. I think the oxygen production is probably offset by the methane production.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #382
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    Deleted User wrote: »
    The UK is a disaster, because of their idiotic decision to ban one of houses they now have some of the smallest properties in the western world. They are THE WORST in the OECD - i.e among wider Europe, US, Canada, Australia & NZ etc.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8201900.stm

    They are forced to live on top of each other in cramped conditions. Self inflicted because of their law.

    You can protect sections of the countryside from one off housing such as national parks - and widen these if necessary. But Ireland has a large rural population and banning one off housing would be forcing another way of life upon people. We are not a dictatorship. If people have a problem with urban/rural tax distribution I suggest that imbalance be fixed instead.
    Ireland has 6 national parks-all tiny. Please open google maps (map version) and put ireland and the UK in the frame. The green bits are national parks. With Ireland and the UK in frame you can't even make out the boundaries of any of the Irish national parks on my laptop screen (cramped as it is ;) ) whereas the UK's are plain to see. Our national parks pay no more than lip service to the notion-quite pathetic really.

    Would you think that property owners living adjacent to existing Irish NPs would be for or against the park's being made bigger to encompass their house? One off housing is so prevalent in Ireland that we cannot expand or create new NPs without encircling lots of houses in the process-the horse has already bolted basically. I think the countryside has effectively been lost across most of what was once rural Ireland. I just think that we should now see urban areas levy and KEEP their own taxes to at least be able to provide good services for their inhabitants. People who want to live in isolation should fend for themselves in all respects.

    Btw, the linked magazine piece (the BBC didn't think it worthy of calling it news) was restricted to an hour's drive of London. You could still have 3000 ft² houses if you wanted, built in villages or hamlets, with street lighting, footpaths and local shops and not build an isolated property, so the space thing is a red herring.


  • Options
    #383
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    He’s hoping for grant assistance to replace the buried car ... a proper filtration system could cost up to €17,000.
    He should be jailed for a number of reasons (breach of planning, possibly falsifying information, water pollution, etc), but instead he's looking for the tax payer to buy him a new septic tank for free.

    Only in Ireland.


  • Options
    #384
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Deleted User wrote:
    The UK is a disaster, because of their idiotic decision to ban one of houses they now have some of the smallest properties in the western world. They are THE WORST in the OECD - i.e among wider Europe, US, Canada, Australia & NZ etc.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8201900.stm

    They are forced to live on top of each other in cramped conditions. Self inflicted because of their law.

    You extrapolated this is the conclusion of Green Belt policies??

    :rolleyes: Please. What nonsense, UK household sizes have been dropping for years.

    _42264590_household_size_203.gif
    You can protect sections of the countryside from one off housing such as national parks - and widen these if necessary. But Ireland has a large rural population and banning one off housing would be forcing another way of life upon people. We are not a dictatorship. If people have a problem with urban/rural tax distribution I suggest that imbalance be fixed instead.

    I suggest you find a nice cabin in Arizona where you can fulminate about 'da Man' trying to force you to send your kids to school...and practice your banjo.

    No-one is being rounded up and forced into Docklands Apartments ffs. :confused:


  • Options
    #385
    Farmer Pudsey
    Registered Users Posts: 6,326 ✭✭✭Farmer Pudsey


    The biggest pollution problem in Ireland is caused by urban waste water treatment plants as stated AGAIN by the EPA. It is the worst kept secret in Ireland. Most of these plants were build too small and any time they have a problem just dump the waste into rivers or the sea. The EPA hasn't the balls to take any County Council to court. Most of our major rivers are open sewers.

    The pollution from one off housing is a fallasey just like that the pollution was all caused by the Pig industry or by cattle farmers as all the investment in these sectors has showm. All the bull that led to closed periods and huge investment in cattle housing in agrilture etc has not cured the problems in our rivers. Because the main problem is under investment in waste water treatmet plants in urban areas. Just because it flows freely into a pipe don't mean that there is not a problem.

    I have no proble paying 50 euro to inspect my septic tank provided that ever urban dweller pays the same to have there waste water treatmet plants inspected and if I have to pay for mine to be upgrade the the same should apply to urban dwellers where the problem exists


  • Options
    #386
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    It is well documented that house sizes have shrunk in the UK

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/6068170/Honey-theyve-shrunk-the-house.html
    Up until 1980 all builders of private housing adhered to the Parker Morris standards, which set a minimum square footage for houses, depending on the number of bedrooms. But the Thatcher revolution, which helped to create a new generation of owner-occupiers, also saw the standards dropped and rooms shrink. The average size of a new room in British house is 15.8 sq m (170 sq ft or, say, 11.5 by 15 feet), almost half the size of those in France.

    The difference is that they do not have the option we have to say to hell with your lego house and build their own. Total disaster.

    I really do want someone to answer how we deal with the millions of cattle, sheep, rats, mice, birds & the horses, pigs, cats and dogs we have in the country using the countryside as an open toilet.

    The truth is that if you keep a distance of a few meters from a river or lake and fit a deep and properly sealed well then the water will be fine.


  • Options
    #387
    elaverty
    Registered Users Posts: 399 ✭✭elaverty


    Sponge Bob wrote: »
    http://www.galwaynews.ie/24320-farmer-comes-clean-his-diy-septic-tank-%E2%80%93-buried-cortina


    Id say that this is someone haveing a laugh and takeing the PISS,,,,It wouldnt work,,,and the old cortina would be worth more now if he had of kept it in the shed and he could now have afforded a treatment system after selling it,,,:)
    :)


  • Options
    #388
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    elaverty wrote: »
    Id say that this is someone haveing a laugh and takeing the PISS,,,,It wouldnt work,,,and the old cortina would be worth more now if he had of kept it in the shed and he could now have afforded a treatment system after selling it,,,:)
    :)
    While the old Cortina example is on the extreme side and I dare say unique, there will almost certainly be plenty of "improvised" systems out there. I know cousins of mine who had such an improvised system. They can't be alone.


  • Options
    #389
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Deleted User wrote: »
    It is well documented that house sizes have shrunk in the UK

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/property/6068170/Honey-theyve-shrunk-the-house.html


    The difference is that they do not have the option we have to say to hell with your lego house and build their own. Total disaster.

    You consider the Telegraph to be a well documented source? The Telegraph is the journalistic equivalent of the Sindo.

    You have posted utter nonsense...there are plenty of sites for sale where you can build your own house; here's 42 of them listed around Norwich -one of the most rural counties in England.

    http://www.rightmove.co.uk/commercial-property-for-sale/find.html?locationIdentifier=REGION%5E1018&displayPropertyType=land_development

    Comparing UK with France is absurd, UK has the 12th highest population density in the world ffs! France comes in 30th, and even that is for the Metropolitian areas...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_sovereign_states_and_dependent_territories_by_population_density
    I really do want someone to answer how we deal with the millions of cattle, sheep, rats, mice, birds & the horses, pigs, cats and dogs we have in the country using the countryside as an open toilet.

    The truth is that if you keep a distance of a few meters from a river or lake and fit a deep and properly sealed well then the water will be fine.


    Are you just ranting now?


  • Options
    #390
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    MadsL wrote: »
    Are you just ranting now?

    you could try answering the question


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #391
    n97 mini
    Registered Users Posts: 8,295 ✭✭✭n97 mini


    Deleted User wrote: »
    And how do we deal with the millions of cattle and millions of sheep pissing and ****ting all over the countryside?

    There are all sorts of rules under the REPS scheme. e.g. lakeshores must be fenced to keep cattle out, and must be prevented from getting closer than 1.5m to any watercourse.


Advertisement