Anyone worried about their FWMS payment?

reilig

Before christmas I wrote here about being worrieed about getting my receipts in on time. But now the tides have turned. According to yesterday's Farming Independent, the Government do not have the money to pay those of us who built under the FWMS. A department spokesperson said that they did not budget for so many people getting their applications in on time.

I'm really surprised by this. I feel that the department knew well how much money that would have to pay out - but they are just trying to worm out of paying the money. Every farmer had the same transparent application which should have allowed the department to budget for how much they would have to pay out. They approved the grant application and drawings. From these drawings, they were able to determine how much of a grant they would have to pay out to each person. When we started the building, we had to inform the department and get written permission, so should the department not have naturally assumed that we would finish the shed and allowed for this money in their budget?

It appears that they haven't. Personally I'm in the sh!t if I don't get my grant. I have a bridging loan for €80k from the bank which costs me €2500 every 6 months in interest. I also took a mortgage at the same time as I started the shed to build a house. I used some money from the mortgage to fund the shed - confident that I would get it back when the grant came through.

They're talking about paying the grant over the next 4 years, but my bank want their money back now or else they want me to start making repayments on the load - which I cannot afford to do as i am already paying my mortgage.

If the government do a u turn on these grants, there'll be uproar.

Anyone got any insight?

irish_bob

i helped my brother whos a full time farmer build a shed before xmas , while i was confident the shed would be completed before the deadline , a bigger question in my mind was when he would recieve his grant , times are tough and its easy to renague on promises when a country is in recession , i think its highly unlikely any money will be paid out this year , i suspect it will be paid over a two year period

another thing , im surprised at the amount of people who put up sheds purely to avail of the grant , you would be much better off building it when you actually need it , building is always more expensive while their is a scheme in place , i reckon about one in five threw up a shed just to avail of the said grant although i suspect theese people had money to fill a hole with and wont be worried about banks , i know on the home farm , no shed was ever put up unless it was absolutley nesscesery

Sam Kade

irish_bob wrote: »

another thing , im surprised at the amount of people who put up sheds purely to avail of the grant , you would be much better off building it when you actually need it , building is always more expensive while their is a scheme in place , i reckon about one in five threw up a shed just to avail of the said grant although i suspect theese people had money to fill a hole with and wont be worried about banks , i know on the home farm , no shed was ever put up unless it was absolutley nesscesery

Bob saying that farmers built sheds just to get the grant is total nonsense. The reason farmers built sheds and slurry tanks is because of the nitrates directive. 16-20 weeks slurry storage for your animals most farmers only had 8 weeks storage as they used to spread slurry all year round. The closed period for slurry spreading put an end to that. Also you would only get the grant for the amount of cattle you had when you applied for the grant, no point telling them I will have 20 cows extra in 2 years time. If you don't have enough slurry storage you can't comply with the nitrates directive and it will mean your SFP will have penalties.

fastrac

Another issue is the Dept retaining the receipts pending approval which prevents you claiming the VAT back putting more pressure on farmers.This is going to have a huge negative effect on farmer spending power until its resolved.

adne

I am in dire straits if i dont get the grant payment soon. I have submitted my receipts since Dec 2nd.

The bank is pushing me for repayments on the bridging loan that I cannot afford. I am also looking for a mortgage but am been declined as I have this bridging loan for 60K.

The Government have a lot to answer for, have we a legal position on this if the government decide to stage the payments over a number of years, Can they be held accountable for the Interest charges which are very high

reilig

adne wrote: »

I am in dire straits if i dont get the grant payment soon. I have submitted my receipts since Dec 2nd.

The bank is pushing me for repayments on the bridging loan that I cannot afford. I am also looking for a mortgage but am been declined as I have this bridging loan for 60K.

The Government have a lot to answer for, have we a legal position on this if the government decide to stage the payments over a number of years, Can they be held accountable for the Interest charges which are very high

Welcome to the boat. I am now in the second year of my bridging loan. I had to renegotiate it in December and resign for it. I feel we have a legal footing on it. Our grant applications and the forms that we received and signed before we started construction were a contract with the Department of Agriculture stating that we would build to a certain standard and that they would pay the grant to us.

If we owed the money to the Department of Ag, they wouldn't wait for it.
The government have given billions of euro to the banks because the bank officials screwed up. Now they're telling us that they don't have the money that the signed a contract with us for.

I didn't build my shed just because of the grant. I needed it. But if I had known that there was not going to be money from the grant, I would have built it without the grant. ie. less steel in the tank and a lower spec shed. It would not have been up to the Dep of Ag standard, but it would have done me.

adne

I dont know what i am going to do if they don't pay up asap....
In the last 6 months I have packed in a excellent job in Dublin to move west and farm parttime to supplement a lesser income

• Been able to Build the Shed under FWM i.e. leave it easier to farm partime
• The Installation Aid - Which has now been pulled and I missed
• The Farm retirement scheme -now been pulled and parents missed
• Build a house at a lower cost - cannot build now as cannot get mortgage due to large Bridging loan I have

The government is a shambles, they are talking about setting up aid for people who cannot repay there mortgages, how about they do it for farmers that they have betrayed and left stranded with there false promises

irish_bob

Sam Kade wrote: »

Bob saying that farmers built sheds just to get the grant is total nonsense. The reason farmers built sheds and slurry tanks is because of the nitrates directive. 16-20 weeks slurry storage for your animals most farmers only had 8 weeks storage as they used to spread slurry all year round. The closed period for slurry spreading put an end to that. Also you would only get the grant for the amount of cattle you had when you applied for the grant, no point telling them I will have 20 cows extra in 2 years time. If you don't have enough slurry storage you can't comply with the nitrates directive and it will mean your SFP will have penalties.

its an undeniable fact that many built just so as to avail of the grant , im not condemming them nor do i hold any truck with the waffle from the dept that they didnt know how many would apply for the grant but i have little sympathy for those who have trouble with banks over sheds they didnt actually urgently need

adne

Its called Foresight Bob!!

If an Authority is silly enough to say they will give a grant for 60% of cost of building the shed, it is there problem if people who do not require a shed decide to build a shed.

The obvious thing that the Department of Agriculture should have done is only provide the Grant to those who require the shed.

irish_bob

adne wrote: »

Its called Foresight Bob!!

If an Authority is silly enough to say they will give a grant for 60% of cost of building the shed, it is there problem if people who do not require a shed decide to build a shed.

The obvious thing that the Department of Agriculture should have done is only provide the Grant to those who require the shed.

so you agree that thier were many who did indeed build sheds simply to take advantage of the grant as opposed to any real immiediete neeed for extra housing , sam on the other hand doesnt believe any farmer done this

as for the dept singing dumb , its simple , if their were fifty six thousand applications in by april 07 , they should have known that a good fifty thousand would follow through and complete thier buildings as per application

reilig

irish_bob wrote: »

its an undeniable fact that many built just so as to avail of the grant , im not condemming them nor do i hold any truck with the waffle from the dept that they didnt know how many would apply for the grant but i have little sympathy for those who have trouble with banks over sheds they didnt actually urgently need

What about the people who built because they needed the sheds or the slurry storage?? There's too many people like you criticising farmers. I know a lot of people that built sheds or tanks under the FWMS, and all of them needed them. They had to show that they had a high enough stocking number to qualify for the grant. I tried to apply to build a shed much larger than what i needed, (because I intend to expand in the near future) but they only grant aided me for a size big enough to match my stocking numbers.
Every other farmer was only grant aided in line with their stocking numbers - not with what they hoped to keep in the future.

nilhg

I was at the National Tillage Conference today and was talking to a Teagasc advisor who reckons he's been told that the grants will be paid out in 3 tranches, over the next three years.

I can't be sure that he's correct but the general plan seems to be to stretch it out over several years.

Sam Kade

reilig wrote: »

What about the people who built because they needed the sheds or the slurry storage?? There's too many people like you criticising farmers. I know a lot of people that built sheds or tanks under the FWMS, and all of them needed them. They had to show that they had a high enough stocking number to qualify for the grant. I tried to apply to build a shed much larger than what i needed, (because I intend to expand in the near future) but they only grant aided me for a size big enough to match my stocking numbers.
Every other farmer was only grant aided in line with their stocking numbers - not with what they hoped to keep in the future.

Exactly, Why would anyone build a shed just for the grant and how would they qualify for a grant if they already had enough slurry storage?

irish_bob

reilig wrote: »

What about the people who built because they needed the sheds or the slurry storage?? There's too many people like you criticising farmers. I know a lot of people that built sheds or tanks under the FWMS, and all of them needed them. They had to show that they had a high enough stocking number to qualify for the grant. I tried to apply to build a shed much larger than what i needed, (because I intend to expand in the near future) but they only grant aided me for a size big enough to match my stocking numbers.
Every other farmer was only grant aided in line with their stocking numbers - not with what they hoped to keep in the future.

you must be thinking of some other person called irish bob in another forum because i never said anything about those who genuinly needed sheds , better perhaps to read posts next time before jumping in feet 1st , oh and spare me the victimization complex about criticising farmers , i was born on a farm and work on the home farm at least once a week , anyone who thinks that no farmer out there put up a shed simply to avail of the grant is in cloud cuckoo land

locky76

Reilig and Adne, i submitted the paperwork last may and got approved for €65,000, however a mate of mine had built the exact same shed two years previously and he had been preapproved for €72,000 (back when they informed you before startup what your approval costings were), i got on to the inspector and informed him of this, with my mates herdnumber and FWMS number, and he upped my costings to €72,000. it seemed to me at the time that the department were realising that they would be grossly overbudget and were penny pinching by underestimating costings!
i'm going throught the same shythe at the moment with my REPS application, whereby they are dillydallying over paperwork, the suckler scheme (inspection 2 weeks before a REPS inspection) and also with the installation aid (i got in before the deadline). impossible shower to deal with!

reilig wrote: »

Before christmas I wrote here about being worrieed about getting my receipts in on time. But now the tides have turned. According to yesterday's Farming Independent, the Government do not have the money to pay those of us who built under the FWMS. A department spokesperson said that they did not budget for so many people getting their applications in on time.

I'm really surprised by this. I feel that the department knew well how much money that would have to pay out - but they are just trying to worm out of paying the money. Every farmer had the same transparent application which should have allowed the department to budget for how much they would have to pay out. They approved the grant application and drawings. From these drawings, they were able to determine how much of a grant they would have to pay out to each person. When we started the building, we had to inform the department and get written permission, so should the department not have naturally assumed that we would finish the shed and allowed for this money in their budget?

It appears that they haven't. Personally I'm in the sh!t if I don't get my grant. I have a bridging loan for €80k from the bank which costs me €2500 every 6 months in interest. I also took a mortgage at the same time as I started the shed to build a house. I used some money from the mortgage to fund the shed - confident that I would get it back when the grant came through.

They're talking about paying the grant over the next 4 years, but my bank want their money back now or else they want me to start making repayments on the load - which I cannot afford to do as i am already paying my mortgage.

If the government do a u turn on these grants, there'll be uproar.

Anyone got any insight?

fastrac

nilhg wrote: »

I was at the National Tillage Conference today and was talking to a Teagasc advisor who reckons he's been told that the grants will be paid out in 3 tranches, over the next three years.

I can't be sure that he's correct but the general plan seems to be to stretch it out over several years.

If this is true has anybody any suggestions about the cheapest way to finance it?

reilig

irish_bob wrote: »

you must be thinking of some other person called irish bob in another forum because i never said anything about those who genuinly needed sheds , better perhaps to read posts next time before jumping in feet 1st , oh and spare me the victimization complex about criticising farmers , i was born on a farm and work on the home farm at least once a week , anyone who thinks that no farmer out there put up a shed simply to avail of the grant is in cloud cuckoo land

No, I'm confident I had the right person. Your posts are suggesting that farmers are screwing the system, when everyone knows that it was impossible to get a grant in the last round unless you really needed the slurry storage.
Anyway, that has nothing to do with this thread. The thread basically says that the government made a cock up in their budgets. ie They approved more than they could pay. Otherwise the thread would be titled "Farmers who cheated the system". Maybe go and start it if you want to debate it.

reilig

fastrac wrote: »

If this is true has anybody any suggestions about the cheapest way to finance it?

Well now that the state ownes Anglo, they should be in a position to give us interest free loans. But I doubt it. The bridging loan is expensive anyway and with interest, mine will soon go above what I expect to get in the grant.

irish_bob

reilig wrote: »

No, I'm confident I had the right person. Your posts are suggesting that farmers are screwing the system, when everyone knows that it was impossible to get a grant in the last round unless you really needed the slurry storage.
Anyway, that has nothing to do with this thread. The thread basically says that the government made a cock up in their budgets. ie They approved more than they could pay. Otherwise the thread would be titled "Farmers who cheated the system". Maybe go and start it if you want to debate it.

this will be my last post responding to any of your posts because your distorting my words , i never once suggested farmers were screwing the system , i said i had no sympathy for a farmer who built a shed purely to take avantage of the grant and now finds themselves under pressure from banks due to the possibility of the dept not fronting up on payments

reilig

irish_bob wrote: »

this will be my last post responding to any of your posts because your distorting my words , i never once suggested farmers were screwing the system , i said i had no sympathy for a farmer who built a shed purely to take avantage of the grant and now finds themselves under pressure from banks due to the possibility of the dept not fronting up on payments

That's fine, but as a number of people explained to you, Farmers did not build build sheds to purely take advantage of the grants because they were not able to get grants approved to do this. So there's no need for sympathy... or lack of. And again, this is not the point of the thread so you not responding will not have any positive or adverse impact on this thread!!!

Sam Kade

irish_bob wrote: »

you must be thinking of some other person called irish bob in another forum because i never said anything about those who genuinly needed sheds , better perhaps to read posts next time before jumping in feet 1st , oh and spare me the victimization complex about criticising farmers , i was born on a farm and work on the home farm at least once a week , anyone who thinks that no farmer out there put up a shed simply to avail of the grant is in cloud cuckoo land

Bob maybe you can explain to us how a farmer can go about getting a grant to build a shed he doesn't need? Or why a farmer would want to build a shed he already has? First of all the department already know how many cattle every farmer have, you can't fool them there. They also inspect your yard before you start building. Maybe you are getting confused with farmers that already have slurry tanks but are not up to standard eg. outdoor tanks that hold a lot of rainwater, which means reduced slurry storage.

snowman707

reilig wrote: »

I have a bridging loan for €80k from the bank which costs me €2500 every 6 months in interest. I also took a mortgage at the same time as I started the shed to build a house. I used some money from the mortgage to fund the shed - confident that I would get it back when the grant came through.

They're talking about paying the grant over the next 4 years, but my bank want their money back now or else they want me to start making repayments on the load - which I cannot afford to do as i am already paying my mortgage.

If the government do a u turn on these grants, there'll be uproar.

Anyone got any insight?

Firstly i sympathize with you & many like you ,

I think you need to sit down with your financial adviser & discuss which option is best suited.

you seem to have got a fairly good rate (6.25% i calculate from your info.) on the bridging loan & I am sure if you put your cards on the table with the bank manager you will get good quote on a term loan maybe over 7 - 10 years with the provider of making bulk sum payments off the balance when finances allow.

if the grant payments are coming in installments as hinted (though this is not yet verified) & you will have your Vat refund also, you should be able to make good inroads with repayments in the first 2-3 years.

I can understand you borrowing for the shed & for your house but for the life of me i cannot understand why you paid out another €42k for a tractor, on top of these.

we were temped to go north looking at tractors around new year's day temped by weak sterling, intending to spend circa €20K but we weighed up the options & considered that all around us are 150 hp tractors idle off the building sites, we reckon if we need a tractor for a couple days a year we will hire 1 in with or without driver.

easier to pay for work done... than make repayments on a yoke lying idle & losing value.

reilig

snowman707 wrote: »

I can understand you borrowing for the shed & for your house but for the life of me i cannot understand why you paid out another €42k for a tractor, on top of these.

we were temped to go north looking at tractors around new year's day temped by weak sterling, intending to spend circa €20K but we weighed up the options & considered that all around us are 150 hp tractors idle off the building sites, we reckon if we need a tractor for a couple days a year we will hire 1 in with or without driver.

easier to pay for work done... than make repayments on a yoke lying idle & losing value.

The tractor won't be idle. It will pay for itself. It will be following 2 balers with a wrapper for the summer. I need it for slurry, mixing and spreading. I've taken land on a lease 30 miles from home. I'll need the tractor to get there with cattle - and to draw bales back from there over the winter. The tractor will be an asset to the farm, repayments can be put against tax, and NH tractors have an excellent resale value.

Why wouldn't I take the loan for the tractor? The Department of Ag have given me a written guarantee that they will pay the grant. My only concern is the timeframe of payment - be it this year or next. In the mean time, I need the tractor and I will be able to make enough from it to meet the repayments on it. If I didn't have the tractor, I wouldn't be able to make the money with it.

On a positive note, last night I attended a function where I met person who works high up in the Dep of Agriculture. I was assured that all the headlines in the paper were just tripe and that the Department intends paying out in full on all grants. The opposition are suggesting that the grants will be paid in stages, but the Minister's intention is that it will be paid in full this year - he is aware of the pressures that many farmers are under with bridging loans and intends to make the payments in full over the next few weeks.

So fingers crossed

fastrac

and toes

snowman707

reilig wrote: »

The tractor won't be idle. It will pay for itself. It will be following 2 balers with a wrapper for the summer. I need it for slurry, mixing and spreading. I've taken land on a lease 30 miles from home. I'll need the tractor to get there with cattle - and to draw bales back from there over the winter. The tractor will be an asset to the farm, repayments can be put against tax, and NH tractors have an excellent resale value.

Why wouldn't I take the loan for the tractor? The Department of Ag have given me a written guarantee that they will pay the grant. My only concern is the timeframe of payment - be it this year or next. In the mean time, I need the tractor and I will be able to make enough from it to meet the repayments on it. If I didn't have the tractor, I wouldn't be able to make the money with it.

On a positive note, last night I attended a function where I met person who works high up in the Dep of Agriculture. I was assured that all the headlines in the paper were just tripe and that the Department intends paying out in full on all grants. The opposition are suggesting that the grants will be paid in stages, but the Minister's intention is that it will be paid in full this year - he is aware of the pressures that many farmers are under with bridging loans and intends to make the payments in full over the next few weeks.

So fingers crossed

you know your own situation best,I was thinking of my own situation & couldn't justify even 20k for tractor at present, but you obviously have considered all the pros & cons.

speaking to my neighbour yesterday , he is also awaiting his payment even though he was inspected & passed last year.

reilig

snowman707 wrote: »

you know your own situation best,I was thinking of my own situation & couldn't justify even 20k for tractor at present, but you obviously have considered all the pros & cons.

speaking to my neighbour yesterday , he is also awaiting his payment even though he was inspected & passed last year.

I rang my local Department of Agriculture office yesterday and they were able to tell me that my inspection was passed and I'm approved for payment. They also told me that I am lucky because there is a freeze on the inspections. They have only inspected 2000 of the 17000 applications. They said that they might be in a position to pay out on these 2000 in the next 8 weeks, but they will not inspect the other 15000 applications until they have money to pay for them. Here's hoping I'm in that first 2000- they said I am, but I'll be happy when i see the money.

Min

I'm waiting for my payment too, it is a concern and it is a building I needed as every other year I outwintered cattle.

We didn't sign up for payments to be spread out over time, they can pay the interest bills if they want to do that.

gernon

Dept. this evening sanctioned the return of receipts on request pre inspection to allow the Farmer claim VAT back.

reilig

gernon wrote: »

Dept. this evening sanctioned the return of receipts on request pre inspection to allow the Farmer claim VAT back.

I actually got a second copy of my VAT receipts from my contractor, so I didn't need to wait for the return of them. Hopefully I will have that money returned soon, might satisfy the bank a little bit.

Sam Kade

reilig wrote: »

I actually got a second copy of my VAT receipts from my contractor, so I didn't need to wait for the return of them. Hopefully I will have that money returned soon, might satisfy the bank a little bit.

I thought that they need the original receipt to refund VAT. Copies won't do or so my accountant tells me.

snowman707

Sam Kade wrote: »

I thought that they need the original receipt to refund VAT. Copies won't do or so my accountant tells me.

Correct,

you must lodge the original & provide a copy for them to keep. I usually drop the Vat claims into Limerick when I am passing through, Must say that the counter staff in Charlottes Quay are always very helpful & friendly.

reilig

Sam Kade wrote: »

I thought that they need the original receipt to refund VAT. Copies won't do or so my accountant tells me.

I didn't get a copy, my contractor gave me 2 identical originals

Min

€7,000,000,000 to the banks from the government, yet only 40% to be paid to farmers this year who are still waiting for their payments under the FWMS, 40% next January and 20% the following year.
It is a right mess they have made of it.....

The minister talked about having talks with the banks to give the most favourable rate to farmers who have bridging loans...
Why don't they just get the banks to not charge interest to farmers and use their bank bailouts to do it....

Sam Kade

reilig wrote: »

I didn't get a copy, my contractor gave me 2 identical originals

I never heard of that till now. Giving 2 identical receipts for the one job or product.

reilig

Min wrote: »

€7,000,000,000 to the banks from the government, yet only 40% to be paid to farmers this year who are still waiting for their payments under the FWMS, 40% next January and 20% the following year.
It is a right mess they have made of it.....

The minister talked about having talks with the banks to give the most favourable rate to farmers who have bridging loans...
Why don't they just get the banks to not charge interest to farmers and use their bank bailouts to do it....

Its a dam shame and a sham. They're bailing out the f*c*ers that got the country into a mess and failing the backbone industry of the country.

fastrac

Farmers were railroaded into this scheme by threats of single payments being stopped.The Dept drove the cost sky high with top of the range specs and now they want to pay over 3 yrs.How many of the 17000 will be forced out of business before this is over.

whelan1

right lets get this straight i am cleared for payment this ages does this mean i am gonna be paid in 3 stages or is it the 17000 that are waiting clearance :mad: i am so pissed off with this scheme at this stage and wish i never started

fastrac

Looks like we are in the wrong country.http://www.fwi.co.uk/Articles/2009/02/11/114239/prompt-single-payments-contribute-to-a-fall-in-farm-borrowing.html

snowman707

Sam Kade wrote: »

I never heard of that till now. Giving 2 identical receipts for the one job or product.

wonder how he makes his returns? I presume each "original" has a different serial no.

snowman707

whelan1 wrote: »

right lets get this straight i am cleared for payment this ages does this mean i am gonna be paid in 3 stages or is it the 17000 that are waiting clearance :mad: i am so pissed off with this scheme at this stage and wish i never started

as late as 1 hour ago i've heard it will be 40%, 40%, & 20% over 3 years, I have no interest in the scheme (not being owned any money) but if this is the case, I will certainly be involved in organizing any protests etc & any politication within 100 miles of me will not get a decent night's for some time

reilig

snowman707 wrote: »

wonder how he makes his returns? I presume each "original" has a different serial no.

He printed off each invoice twice - both had the same serial number, he stamped them as paid and signed them. He did this for all people that he did work for under the FWMS. Other contractors in the area did the same thing.
Its only if the receipt has "copy" written on it or if it is clearly a photocopy that you cannot claim the Vat back with it.

fastrac

I rang Dept earlier for my receipts and told they will not hand them out on demand as they dont have staff because of Reps 4.If im not to be inspected soon(they cant tell me a date for that either) they will post the receipts to me in around a week.

leg wax

fastrac wrote: »

Farmers were railroaded into this scheme by threats of single payments being stopped.The Dept drove the cost sky high with top of the range specs and now they want to pay over 3 yrs.How many of the 17000 will be forced out of business before this is over.

you could have sold your entitlements and put ur two fingers up too the dept. its wrong whats happened but being farmers we have no say or power as long as we have too many organisations[ifa/icmsa]

reilig

leg wax wrote: »

you could have sold your entitlements and put ur two fingers up too the dept. its wrong whats happened but being farmers we have no say or power as long as we have too many organisations[ifa/icmsa]

I hate to say it, but I have to agree with you about too many organisations - if Farmers were represented by 1 organisation or union, then we would have far more leverage. If other sectors were all represented by 1 or 2 unions, then they too would have a lot more leverage instead of each union/organisation competing with oneanother.
Me thinks in the past, all of these unions / organisations were set up just to create employment for people.

whelan1

i rang local office this am all farmers when approved will get 40% - this is a total joke ,again we are made fools of , remember this when the next elections come around

snowman707

[QUOTE=reilig;588450

On a positive note, last night I attended a function where I met person who works high up in the Dep of Agriculture. I was assured that all the headlines in the paper were just tripe and that the Department intends paying out in full on all grants. The opposition are suggesting that the grants will be paid in stages, but the Minister's intention is that it will be paid in full this year - he is aware of the pressures that many farmers are under with bridging loans and intends to make the payments in full over the next few weeks.

So fingers crossed [/QUOTE]

doesn't look that way now, just wonder how "high" in the dept this person was?

the dogs in the street knew since last May (2008) that funds for this scheme were running low,

many people will lose a portion of the grant to the banks on interest charges

not only have this shower on gangsters defaulted on this, they are also reneged on reps 4

i know how I will be voting from now, starting with the local elections in June.

reilig

snowman707 wrote: »

doesn't look that way now, just wonder how "high" in the dept this person was?

the dogs in the street knew since last May (2008) that funds for this scheme were running low,

many people will lose a portion of the grant to the banks on interest charges

not only have this shower on gangsters defaulted on this, they are also reneged on reps 4

i know how I will be voting from now, starting with the local elections in June.

Yea, its pretty lame allright. I don't agree with you saying that people knew that funds were running low last may - if they were, they would not have approved the 4000 to start their work that they did after may 1 2008.

But I agree that people, including myself, stand to lose a significant amount to bank interest that I had budgeted for. The REPS 4 is going to get a rattle too I suspect. I fear they will close the scheme shortly.

I'm angry too, and wish I would be able to voice my anger with my vote, but who would you suggest we vote for? The FF's are gangsters, the fg's do nothing but complain - and if I had to listen to Kenny as Taoiseach, I would emigrate. Did you read the interview with John Gormley in today's Journal? The green's would put every farmer in the country out of business if they got their way. As for labour - well their history speaks for itself. My local councilor is FF, and she is angry as hell with her party. I wouldn't vote for her because of her party, I'd vote for her because she gets things done, she got me planning for my shed when I ran into problems. Don't vote for someone out of a protest against a political party, vote for them if you believe that they will be able to help you. Feck the party!!

Now I don't want to debate with anyone about politics, because I know very little about it, but sometimes I wonder is it better to have the devil you know?

whelan1

girl in my local grant office said we should sue the department for going back on their side of the deal !!! :rolleyes::rolleyes: i am gonna have to have a serious chat with bank man next week

reilig

whelan1 wrote: »

girl in my local grant office said we should sue the department for going back on their side of the deal !!! :rolleyes::rolleyes: i am gonna have to have a serious chat with bank man next week

Don't worry, the Dep have themselves well covered against being sued.
I'm going to wait to see how much I'll get before I go negotiating with my bank manager to get my bridging loan transferred into a farm loan - I'm sure it won't be a problem and it will be given on the strength of the Dep's letter which will state how and when they will pay the grant. Also, I'm going to shop around for the loan and take the cheapest one available.

adne

Just had a call from my Bank Manager.
She said they calling all people who have loans outstanding for the FWMS.
Wanted to know had i received any payment and querying how i proposed to repay the loan.
I told her I would repay the 40% i owed, told her take the other 60% out of the 7 billion the government paid into the bank
This is crazy.... People have to make FF aware of what they are doing......

Min

It is crazy what the government are doing with this scheme.

They should know that for the vast majority this money would be going into banks to pay for loans, banks which they are throwing money at.
Maybe they want to help out the banks with more interest.....