Septic tank charges

chieftan65 · 25-01-2012 6:11pm #1

Just a reminder to all my fellow country dwellers to register your septic thanks for inspection. I personally will register mine when Phil Hogan agrees to come and inspect it personally. I will let him get down in the tank so he can fully appreciate what the majority of people in this country find themselves up to the neck in to ensure that Phil and his fellow elite can receive a tap on the back and be called good little europeans. It didn't work with the OAP's phil and you wont bully the rural dwellers either

the drifter · 25-01-2012 6:23pm

erm....how does one register? if one was going to that is?

focusowner · 25-01-2012 7:27pm

i think i may have had an ingenious idea relating to the charge for the septic tank

we have a bit of land at the house so this would only work if you had some land but regardless

the charge applies to septic tanks only ....

so throw a set of cattle slats over it and 3 walls back and sides only and hey presto slatted cattle shed no need to register

so if someone comes out and says where is you're effluent going just say you use the shed job done

Rockery Woman · 25-01-2012 7:35pm

Would these "Inspectors" be classified as trespassers if they came to inspect your tank on your land uninvited?

Oh yes I must register.............not!!!
:mad:

Us rural dwellers being screwed again!

ardmacha · 25-01-2012 7:59pm

The usual bleating. It is no more unreasonable to have a septic tank inspection charge than a charge for a NCT inspection or a driving test.

sh1tstirrer · 25-01-2012 8:23pm

Rockery Woman wrote: »

Would these "Inspectors" be classified as trespassers if they came to inspect your tank on your land uninvited?

Oh yes I must register.............not!!!
:mad:

Us rural dwellers being screwed again!

No they wouldn't, they have the authority to come onto your property. I had a farmyard inspection from the council back in 2004 he walked in parked his car outside my house and poked his way around my yard only showing me his id when I confronted him. If they tripped over themselves while on your property it wouldn't surprise me if they could claim off you :mad:

bbsrs · 25-01-2012 8:57pm

I built a new house 5 years ago in accordance with the planning permission given to me . The co. council asked that an approved person that was on some list they had , had to pickout the bio cycle treatment system I was to use and design the percolation area before they would grant planning he also had to oversee the installation of the unit and the construction of the percolation area .Upon completion he then had to write a report stating that all was as it should be. My planning also required i sign up for a 5 year maintenance agreement with the supplier of the system.
So the Co. Council know what system I have installed , what regulations it was designed to and when it was installed .They also know i have a maintenance agreement that runs out this summer.

My question is will they want to inspect my sewage treatment set up eventhough they know all there is to know about it and it was built and installed by a person approved by them?

bbsrs · 25-01-2012 9:00pm

ardmacha wrote: »

The usual bleating. It is no more unreasonable to have a septic tank inspection charge than a charge for a NCT inspection or a driving test.

In your opinion.

chieftan65 · 25-01-2012 9:20pm

ardmacha wrote: »

The usual bleating. It is no more unreasonable to have a septic tank inspection charge than a charge for a NCT inspection or a driving test.

Ah good man.. very patriotic... here any chance you can pay mine too? and me NCT and me household charge and me car tax and me PRSI and me PAYE and me income levy. and sure maybe if you have enough left over you could pay for my petrol and heating oil and electricity and food too. dont worry about the kids cause if you pay all that i'll have a few quid to look after them.. cheers friend

irishh_bob · 25-01-2012 9:39pm

bbsrs wrote: »

In your opinion.

mine too and im a rural dweller with my own septic tank , i dont buy into this rural - urban divide gombeen bull**** , spouted by the likes of populists like mattie mc grath

the bottom line is the country is broke and needs money , they could come up with a sharpen your pencil tax and it would all mean the same thing , the goverment feels the need to come up with an endless number of small spread out taxes because they havent the guts to simply cut wages , wellfare etc , it all goes into the same pot as local goverment is a sham in this country

ardmacha · 25-01-2012 10:05pm

My question is will they want to inspect my sewage treatment set up eventhough they know all there is to know about it and it was built and installed by a person approved by them?

Like the NCT they should start with the older setups.

dont worry about the kids cause if you pay all that i'll have a few quid to look after them.

.

Your children's allowance and funding for yours kids education is coming from the likes of me. Which is fine, everyone has to pay their share.

murphaph · 25-01-2012 10:06pm

bbsrs wrote: »

I built a new house 5 years ago in accordance with the planning permission given to me . The co. council asked that an approved person that was on some list they had , had to pickout the bio cycle treatment system I was to use and design the percolation area before they would grant planning he also had to oversee the installation of the unit and the construction of the percolation area .Upon completion he then had to write a report stating that all was as it should be. My planning also required i sign up for a 5 year maintenance agreement with the supplier of the system.
So the Co. Council know what system I have installed , what regulations it was designed to and when it was installed .They also know i have a maintenance agreement that runs out this summer.

My question is will they want to inspect my sewage treatment set up eventhough they know all there is to know about it and it was built and installed by a person approved by them?

You admit yourself that your maintenance contract runs out this year, so of course the system should be inspected. Septic tanks don't maintain themselves any more than cars and can do tremendous damage to the environment if they fail in service. Somebody has to ensure that they are not polluting the groundwater as if Cavan CoCo figures are anything to go by, about one quarter of septic tank owners have tanks with issues.

The NCT analogy is spot on. For years we dodged implementing that EU directive as well.

I think new septic tanks installed by certified installers should perhaps be exempt from inspection for the first few years, just like a new car is exempt from the NCT.

Welease · 25-01-2012 10:21pm

murphaph wrote: »

You admit yourself that your maintenance contract runs out this year, so of course the system should be inspected. Septic tanks don't maintain themselves any more than cars and can do tremendous damage to the environment if they fail in service. Somebody has to ensure that they are not polluting the groundwater as if Cavan CoCo figures are anything to go by, about one quarter of septic tank owners have tanks with issues.

The NCT analogy is spot on. For years we dodged implementing that EU directive as well.

I think new septic tanks installed by certified installers should perhaps be exempt from inspection for the first few years, just like a new car is exempt from the NCT.

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.

Cedrus · 25-01-2012 10:43pm

bbsrs wrote: »

I built a new house 5 years ago in accordance with the planning permission given to me . The co. council asked that an approved person that was on some list they had , had to pickout the bio cycle treatment system I was to use and design the percolation area before they would grant planning he also had to oversee the installation of the unit and the construction of the percolation area .Upon completion he then had to write a report stating that all was as it should be. My planning also required i sign up for a 5 year maintenance agreement with the supplier of the system.
So the Co. Council know what system I have installed , what regulations it was designed to and when it was installed .They also know i have a maintenance agreement that runs out this summer.

My question is will they want to inspect my sewage treatment set up eventhough they know all there is to know about it and it was built and installed by a person approved by them?

I'd consider that report as "inspection complete" and any authority who demands a repeat inspection of this is just wasting money. In fairness if it could even be thought possible that this approved system would fail after so little time then they didn't do their job.

murphaph wrote: »

I think new septic tanks installed by certified installers should perhaps be exempt from inspection for the first few years, just like a new car is exempt from the NCT.

I agree, and it should be tiered from the oldest systems with no planning conditions inspected first, through those which were installed with with minimal conditions, then those that were nominally reviewed/signed off at construction stage. The last to be inspected (if ever) should be the gold standard like bbsrs's one.

murphaph · 25-01-2012 10:48pm

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.

It's an EU directive we've (with the exception of Cavan CC) been ignoring for 20 years. We are facing fines for not implementing it.

The NCT is not a revenue raising exercise. They actually check things are in order with stadardised testing (better than the UK MoT). It was implemented at a time when no extra revenue was needed. It was implemented under pressure from the EU who had passed the directive years before. This is no different except that we are broke at the same time.

Icepick · 25-01-2012 11:14pm

Are you polluting your and your neighbour's land?
If not, what's the problem?

jased10s · 25-01-2012 11:15pm

where theirs muck their is money.

Liam Byrne · 26-01-2012 12:12am

ardmacha wrote: »

The usual bleating. It is no more unreasonable to have a septic tank inspection charge than a charge for a NCT inspection or a driving test.

Will you be paying for an inspection of your taxpayer-provided urban sewage system ?

And what if the level of inspection is the same calibre as the inspections of Priory House or the Financial Regulator ?

Godge · 26-01-2012 12:36am

ardmacha wrote: »

The usual bleating. It is no more unreasonable to have a septic tank inspection charge than a charge for a NCT inspection or a driving test.

So right, and it doesn't matter if the thread is about septic tank charges, water charges, property tax, motor tax, tolls, etc. there is always a moan.

chieftan65 · 26-01-2012 9:51am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Will you be paying for an inspection of your taxpayer-provided urban sewage system ?

And what if the level of inspection is the same calibre as the inspections of Priory House or the Financial Regulator ?

well said liam

MadsL · 26-01-2012 10:34am

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Will you be paying for an inspection of your taxpayer-provided urban sewage system ?

And what if the level of inspection is the same calibre as the inspections of Priory House or the Financial Regulator ?

Strawman nonsense.

Scofflaw · 26-01-2012 11:30am

Icepick wrote: »

Are you polluting your and your neighbour's land?
If not, what's the problem?

The problem is that if you do, as a result of a poor septic tank, clean-up is next to impossible. The "stitch in time saves nine" rule applies to pollution with "nine" replaced by a very much larger number.

They've been doing this in Cavan for the last 8 years, and rural life in Cavan hasn't collapsed as a result. And while they'll have to pay the registration fee for the national scheme, they're unlikely to have to pay for remediation or repair work, because they'll already have had to do that.

cordially,
Scofflaw

jackiebaron · 26-01-2012 11:47am

sh1tstirrer wrote: »

No they wouldn't, they have the authority to come onto your property. I had a farmyard inspection from the council back in 2004 he walked in parked his car outside my house and poked his way around my yard only showing me his id when I confronted him. If they tripped over themselves while on your property it wouldn't surprise me if they could claim off you :mad:

But couldn't you just beat the crap out of him claiming that he was trespassing. When they (the courts) claim that he presented his ID you could simply say that you can't read. :pac:

jackiebaron · 26-01-2012 11:52am

irishh_bob wrote: »

mine too and im a rural dweller with my own septic tank , i dont buy into this rural - urban divide gombeen bull**** , spouted by the likes of populists like mattie mc grath

the bottom line is the country is broke and needs money , they could come up with a sharpen your pencil tax and it would all mean the same thing , the goverment feels the need to come up with an endless number of small spread out taxes because they havent the guts to simply cut wages , wellfare etc , it all goes into the same pot as local goverment is a sham in this country

Hey, I'm broke.....would you be happy to pay a little bit extra to get some money into my pocket even though I'm the cause of my own "brokeness"?

irishh_bob · 26-01-2012 12:56pm

jackiebaron wrote: »

Hey, I'm broke.....would you be happy to pay a little bit extra to get some money into my pocket even though I'm the cause of my own "brokeness"?

the goverment conjures up bogus charges like this septic tank thing because it doesnt discriminate , everyone pays it , its a cowardly charge , as i said earlier , if they cut the old age pension , took medical cards of those over seventy earning 650 euro per week and cut public sector pay , none of theese half measures would be nesscesery but the public would be equally outraged about those moves

murphaph · 26-01-2012 1:09pm

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Will you be paying for an inspection of your taxpayer-provided urban sewage system ?

Urban dwellers receive fewer social transfers than rural dwellers, so urban dwellers are already paying for whatever inspections and maintenance take place in urban sewage treatment systems.

Liam Byrne wrote: »

And what if the level of inspection is the same calibre as the inspections of Priory House or the Financial Regulator ?

Well, why not eliminate all inspections and testing based on this argument? Who says my driving tester is up to the job? Why not just give me a licence based on my own "self assessment"? My car doesn't need to be NCT'ed, sure I know it's safe

Sierra Oscar · 26-01-2012 1:38pm

murphaph wrote: »

Urban dwellers receive fewer social transfers than rural dwellers, so urban dwellers are already paying for whatever inspections and maintenance take place in urban sewage treatment systems.

Do you have some stats to back that up? I am a septic tank owner (live less than a mile outside a town - not up the Wicklow mountains or the likes) and I see very few social transfers coming my way.

Manach · 26-01-2012 1:50pm

There is a rule of thumb in enviromental law, polluter pays. This is well established and would allow the Courts to engage with issues from leaky tanks - if it were to be proved that this was at a measurable harmful impact to the environment. As governments usually have a degree of latitude on how to implement EU directives, this could be tried first without the need of a yet another new tax-funded agency.

ardmacha · 26-01-2012 2:09pm

Urban dwellers receive fewer social transfers than rural dwellers,

This too is simplistic. For instance, you only have to look at the higher rates of rent supplement paid in urban areas.

But this doesn't change the point. People on public sewers should pay a service charge. People providing their own facilities should be inspected. The government's mistake here was not introducing an urban charge.

Scofflaw · 26-01-2012 2:22pm

Manach wrote: »

There is a rule of thumb in enviromental law, polluter pays. This is well established and would allow the Courts to engage with issues from leaky tanks - if it were to be proved that this was at a measurable harmful impact to the environment. As governments usually have a degree of latitude on how to implement EU directives, this could be tried first without the need of a yet another new tax-funded agency.

The problem identified was that the Irish system - in every county bar Cavan - lacks any inspection regime, and may also lack an adequately enforced registration regime. So a first step is registration and the creation of an inspection regime.

ardmacha wrote:

This too is simplistic. For instance, you only have to look at the higher rates of rent supplement paid in urban areas.

Still, net social transfers are basically from Dublin (& hinterland) and Cork to everywhere else.

ardmacha wrote:

But this doesn't change the point. People on public sewers should pay a service charge. People providing their own facilities should be inspected. The government's mistake here was not introducing an urban charge.

That would be the domestic rates that were abolished in a vote-grabber back in the day, effectively putting the burden on local funding onto businesses only (and it's quite a burden - my office rates are a 10% of my rent, and while the landlords are open to the idea that recessions might involve lowering their charges, my rates haven't budged).

cordially,
Scofflaw

Sierra Oscar · 26-01-2012 5:55pm

Manach wrote: »

There is a rule of thumb in enviromental law, polluter pays. This is well established and would allow the Courts to engage with issues from leaky tanks - if it were to be proved that this was at a measurable harmful impact to the environment. As governments usually have a degree of latitude on how to implement EU directives, this could be tried first without the need of a yet another new tax-funded agency.

But I am not polluting, so why am I paying?

Idbatterim · 26-01-2012 6:04pm

The Eu are the ones forcing the issue here, its not our government, they will be fined shortly if they dont introduce these charges. The charge is negligible in any event.

Sierra Oscar · 26-01-2012 6:05pm

Idbatterim wrote: »

The Eu are the ones forcing the issue here, its not our government, they will be fined shortly if they dont introduce these charges. The charge is negligible in any event.

The EU is requiring general compliance and is in no way determining the exact current provisions of the bill progressing through Leinster House.

Cedrus · 26-01-2012 6:18pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

But I am not polluting, so why am I paying?

Prove It.
No proof = No compliance

Cool Mo D · 26-01-2012 6:25pm

ardmacha wrote: »

This too is simplistic. For instance, you only have to look at the higher rates of rent supplement paid in urban areas.

But this doesn't change the point. People on public sewers should pay a service charge. People providing their own facilities should be inspected. The government's mistake here was not introducing an urban charge.

No it isn't too simplistic. The only parts of the country that pay more tax than they receive in Government spending are Dublin and Cork city.

And people connected to the public water system will be paying for it soon enough too.

Scofflaw · 26-01-2012 7:03pm

Sierra Oscar wrote: »

But I am not polluting, so why am I paying?

Because you own a potential source of pollution. That source will be inspected to see if it is likely to cause pollution, and to help prevent it from doing so. The cost is relatively nominal.

If in fact you did cause any significant pollution, you would probably not in fact be required to pay anything because you're unlikely to be capable of making a meaningful payment towards the cleanup costs.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Icepick · 26-01-2012 7:10pm

Scofflaw wrote: »

The problem is that if you do, as a result of a poor septic tank, clean-up is next to impossible. The "stitch in time saves nine" rule applies to pollution with "nine" replaced by a very much larger number.

They've been doing this in Cavan for the last 8 years, and rural life in Cavan hasn't collapsed as a result. And while they'll have to pay the registration fee for the national scheme, they're unlikely to have to pay for remediation or repair work, because they'll already have had to do that.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Will people actually be forced to clean up or only to fix/rebuild the tank?
Either way, their ignorance is the cause.

L1011 · 26-01-2012 10:32pm

Liam Byrne wrote: »

Will you be paying for an inspection of your taxpayer-provided urban sewage system ?

Seeing as its maintained by the council, which I fund as a taxpayer, I'm already paying for those inspections.

Which I know happen, as I've seen them being done. CCTV kit down manholes, etc.

bbsrs · 26-01-2012 10:41pm

MYOB wrote: »

Seeing as its maintained by the council, which I fund as a taxpayer, I'm already paying for those inspections.

Which I know happen, as I've seen them being done. CCTV kit down manholes, etc.

Well as a rural taxpayer should I be entitled to the same council inspections without extra charges?

L1011 · 26-01-2012 10:45pm

bbsrs wrote: »

Well as a rural taxpayer should I be entitled to the same council inspections without extra charges?

Get connected to the municipal sewerage system.

Economies of scale. Those of us who burden the state less for basic services happen to get a few others in return.

"rural taxpayers" rely on transfers from urban areas - specifically one large urban area - to support their state services. They can't cover them themselves.

antoobrien · 27-01-2012 11:48am

MYOB wrote: »

Seeing as its maintained by the council, which I fund as a taxpayer, I'm already paying for those inspections.

Which I know happen, as I've seen them being done. CCTV kit down manholes, etc.

Sorry MYOB but rural sewage is not provided free of charge by the council like in towns, the owner pays full whack to build their facilities. I don't even know if there's a charge to connect into an urban network

Meanwhile urban sewage & water is subsidised by by rural dwellers through motor tax, while they often have to pay a group scheme for water.

ardmacha · 27-01-2012 11:56am

No it isn't too simplistic. The only parts of the country that pay more tax than they receive in Government spending are Dublin and Cork city.

I don't doubt this. But there is considerable government spending in Dublin on hospitals, universities and government itself, generating much of this tax.

northknife · 27-01-2012 12:07pm

Why do they need us to pay €50 to register.

Haven't they got this information already with our planning applications.

Get these dopes in the planning offices to do a bit of work for a change and sort through applicants that were successful and built septic tanks.

It's not as if they are over worked now is it.

LK_Dave · 27-01-2012 12:28pm

The solution is composting toilets. Why pay for a septic tank upgrade when money is tight when a bucket and some sawdust will suffice.

I still have elderly relatives who do not have plumbing in their cottage. The hedge still servers them.

L1011 · 27-01-2012 1:37pm

antoobrien wrote: »

Sorry MYOB but rural sewage is not provided free of charge by the council like in towns, the owner pays full whack to build their facilities

Which they should have been fully aware of when they made the choice to build in the country.

antoobrien · 27-01-2012 1:44pm

MYOB wrote: »

Which they should have been fully aware of when they made the choice to build in the country.

They were - it's included in the cost of building the dwelling.

So why are they being asked to pay up even more despite any evidence that they are polluting?

wiseguy · 27-01-2012 1:44pm

I have an waste-treatment plant which was 5x more expensive than septic tank to install
and costs 170 a year to inspect during the yearly inspection.

Will I have to pay again for someone else to examine it?

L1011 · 27-01-2012 1:48pm

antoobrien wrote: »

So why are they being asked to pay up even more despite any evidence that they are polluting?

Studys have shown that a large number of them are polluting, hence the EU order to ensure they get inspected.

Ensuring something works and repairing it if not is part of the maintainence people should have budgeted to cover.

Manach · 27-01-2012 2:14pm

MYOB wrote: »

Studys have shown that a large number of them are polluting, hence the EU order to ensure they get inspected.

Ensuring something works and repairing it if not is part of the maintainence people should have budgeted to cover.

Could you link on those studies, thanks.

Most human activities can impact the environment. For these tanks, are they of such that it would have that adverse consequences?
That would could be classed as polluting to a degree that would harm health.
That given the differing geology in Ireland, is a nation wide scheme needed.

Furthermore, the EU has core competances, one being the environment. However, in the context of the EU project, this historical should be targeted at the industrial base and not the common citizens, thus IMHO they overstep their authority.

n97 mini · 27-01-2012 2:29pm

Funny thing is there seem to be a lot of protestors from Galway in particular. Do they not remember crypto, and what caused it.

This is a modest charge (which is subsidised) to save people from being poisoned by their own shit. (And their neighbours')

wiseguy · 27-01-2012 2:31pm

n97 mini wrote: »

Funny thing is there seem to be a lot of protestors from Galway in particular. Do they not remember crypto, and what caused it.

This is a modest charge (which is subsidised) to save people from being poisoned by their own shit. (And their neighbours')

From what I remember it was town waste system in Tuam town that caused the crypto outbreak, not septic tanks.

This i a charge that will not go to improve the environment nor is it ringfenced.

Septic tank charges

Comments