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

Are you going to pay the household charge? [Part 1]

Options
1…267268270272273…334

Comments

  • Options
    #8072
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    prinz wrote: »
    Do you see the irony in this though? What's to stop people who have paid the charge levelling the same accusations against those who choose not to...

    Level away.
    They gave in too easy......... whether through ignorance, laziness, apathy, fear.......
    They may be will to carry the burden for the rest (wasters and/or objectors) but that's their choice.
    My choice and the choice of over 1 million+ citizens is to say "No More".
    Fix the bloody thing or fuck off.

    black francis wrote: »
    'Naivety' seems to be today's word, and it's a trait that seems to be in much evidence on the 'no side'.

    Frightening to think that presumably some of these people were trusted with mortgages of hundreds of thousands of euro.

    No mortgage here bub.
    Bought outright and fixed up by myself.
    No rent to pay........... and that is how it will stay


  • Options
    #8073
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    prinz wrote: »
    my parents have stumped up the cash, with the two of them living on one pension between them, having been hard working law abiding citizens all their lives.

    Doesn't make sense.


  • Options
    #8074
    Chucky the tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,341 ✭✭✭✭Chucky the tree


    sunflower27 wrote: »
    So they are going to then send all the nonpayers to prison? Riiiight :D

    My guess is they'll fine a few of the non-payers first, then fine the rest who don't fall into line. Once you don't pay a court fine it'll be prison. The question is if people see other non-payers getting large fines will they be happy to stand their ground? I think not.

    Ghandee wrote: »
    You asked the question:confused:

    Debt collector: Someone who collects a debt. (is the clue not in the name?)


    You're right, I phrased that poorly. They'll most either send out council workers or else send out letters of notice and then a summons. Although it's hard to know at this stage. If people are facing a summons I'm not sure they'll be so quick to ignore it.


  • Options
    #8075
    Frank Black
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,296 ✭✭✭Frank Black


    DerryRed wrote: »
    They should cut our green areas because it was in the agreement that was signed when we bought our houses. It said that "the green areas will be maintained by the developer until such time that the council takes over the estate and responsibility of this maintenance".

    When the time came for the council to take over they refused to do it because of "lack of funds". They agreed to give us a grant towards the cutting if we raised some funds ourselves. We did so and of course every year since the grant has been cut in half, due to "lack of funds"

    There are multiple estates in our local area. Older estates have the funding of their grass cutting paid in full by the council and the newer estates don't. If the problem is down to a "lack of funds", then I'm assuming that if we pay the charge they'll be able to do it.

    Can't believe we wasted so much time on side issues when the whole 'getting the grass cut outside DerryRed's house' was criminally ignored.


  • Options
    #8076
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    mikom wrote: »
    Level away.

    Ok, you are no more interested in fairness than the people in the council houses and caravans that you are looking down at. You are going to sit back and let people pay for the services you will use no questions asked. You are going to be a freeloader on the backs of others, sound familiar?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8077
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    this interests me:
    Under the Local Government (Household Charge) Act 2011 any property that was purchased under Affordable Housing Scheme from a Local Authority on 1st January IS LIABLE for the Household Charge.
    Liability falls on all co-owners but payment by any one co-owner discharges the liability of all co-owners. While Section 3 of the Local Government (Household Charge) Act 2011 provides for the fact that co-owners of a property shall be liable for the Charge any one of the co-owners of a property can pay the Charge.

    On the Affordable Housing Scheme... let the government pay it! :D
    Chucky the tree wrote: »
    My guess is they'll fine a few of the non-payers first, then fine the rest who don't fall into line.

    first people to be fined will be the TD's that are telling people not to pay.


  • Options
    #8078
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    mikom wrote: »
    Keep your grubby hands off the family home is what I am saying.
    I will not have a ground rent hanging over my paid for house each and every year.
    That wasn’t what you were saying! :) You made the argument that council wastage should be addressed. The question (that you did not answer) was, why is addressing waste an issue for the new funding mode and not a relevant one regardless of what funding model is used?

    As for grubby hands, “our” hands M, “our” hands. The government is not some colonial ruler who skim of the hard earn cashed of the peasants. Any why? Why not keep our grubby hands of the family car, or the family food or anything else that might be used to generate revenue? What is your fundamental principle (rejected by every country in Europe, FWIW) that says the bricks and mortar should be exempt?
    mikom wrote: »
    Unfairness does not even begin to describe it. You cope on you own, pull your own weight......... and all you get is a hand out looking for more.
    mikom wrote: »
    My choice and the choice of over 1 million+ citizens is to say "No More".

    Once again. You WILL be paying this charge, if not by the current mode then by another one, and a lot more besides unfortunately. How can the no side continue to fail to see this evident truth. Alas, you (and I and many others) will be asked for more, a lot more but by modes that you can do nothing about.

    If the no campaign did succeed, the big losers will be the government obviously, but the big winners would be the super-rich. The government would be very slow in trying to implement a wealth-based (i.e. property) tax if the no side win. Or at least that what the super-rich are hoping for.

    And can you cite ANY tax / cut that came into effect since austerity began which you think was fair (given that they are a consequence of the public bailing out failed private enterprise)?


  • Options
    #8079
    DerryRed
    Registered Users Posts: 472 ✭✭DerryRed


    black francis wrote: »
    Can't believe we wasted so much time on side issues when the whole 'getting the grass cut outside DerryRed's house' was criminally ignored.

    If they are going to put ads on the radio and leaflets through our doors claiming that this money is going towards local services, then do you not think we have a right to expect a local service like grass cutting to be included?


  • Options
    #8080
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    lugha wrote: »
    Once again. You WILL be paying this charge, if not by the current mode then by another one, and a lot more besides unfortunately.

    That's such an arrogant and ignorant statement you know that! :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #8081
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    prinz wrote: »
    Ok, you are no more interested in fairness than the people in the council houses and caravans that you are looking down at. You are going to sit back and let people pay for the services you will use no questions asked. You are going to be a freeloader on the backs of others, sound familiar?

    Yes I am going to sit back.
    Sit back in the countryside with no street lights, street cleaning, libraries, public parks, a private water scheme, a private septic tank.
    Sit back while some one in a corporation hose who earns a wage has access to all the services but pays nothing.
    Sit back so long that an uneven and unfair tax is abolished and a fairer one is put in its place.
    There will be no freeloaders then.
    Pity your ould pair folded so easily, as they could have been part of the solution.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8082
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    smash wrote: »
    Doesn't make sense.

    It makes perfect sense. You know that non-contributory state pension is means tested yes? You know the contributory state pension is of no use to the thousands of women who were forced out of work back in the day because they got married? You realise there are thousands of women around the country in the same situation where they have no entitlement to a pension in their own right and are dependant on the pension of a spouse? Or are you going to say that someone who stays in the home and rears a family of kids hasn't worked hard?


  • Options
    #8083
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    mikom wrote: »
    Sit back so long that an uneven and unfair tax is abolished and a fairer one is put in its place..

    LOL, as if the people objecting to the household charge have any interest whatsoever in paying a "fairer tax"... :pac: The same talking heads will be mouthing off then too as long as any such tax applies to them.


  • Options
    #8084
    sunflower27
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,822 ✭✭✭sunflower27


    Chucky the tree wrote: »
    My guess is they'll fine a few of the non-payers first, then fine the rest who don't fall into line. Once you don't pay a court fine it'll be prison. The question is if people see other non-payers getting large fines will they be happy to stand their ground? I think not.





    You're right, I phrased that poorly. They'll most either send out council workers or else send out letters of notice and then a summons. Although it's hard to know at this stage. If people are facing a summons I'm not sure they'll be so quick to ignore it.

    They can't just fine 'some', they have to fine everyone and there is nowhere near enough prison space or money to pay for the people in prison.

    The government know that if they start doing this then they can kiss goodbye to being in for another term. They know it and hopefully all those that haven't yet paid know it too ;)


  • Options
    #8085
    donalg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    DerryRed wrote: »
    They should cut our green areas because it was in the agreement that was signed when we bought our houses. It said that "the green areas will be maintained by the developer until such time that the council takes over the estate and responsibility of this maintenance".

    When the time came for the council to take over they refused to do it because of "lack of funds". They agreed to give us a grant towards the cutting if we raised some funds ourselves. We did so and of course every year since the grant has been cut in half, due to "lack of funds"

    There are multiple estates in our local area. Older estates have the funding of their grass cutting paid in full by the council and the newer estates don't. If the problem is down to a "lack of funds", then I'm assuming that if we pay the charge they'll be able to do it.

    No the legislation was changed a few years ago to say that the cutting of grass or maintaining of green areas within estates will not be included in the Council's duties if the estate is taken in charge. If anything you were lucky to get a grant from the Council for this, in some estates I know they dont and never have got anything for this, instead the residents take it in turns to cut the green areas.

    Did you sign the agreement with the Council when you bought the house or with a developer?


  • Options
    #8086
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    prinz wrote: »
    LOL, as if the people objecting to the household charge have any interest whatsoever in paying a "fairer tax"... :pac:

    Yuk, yuk........... laugh it up prinner.
    I can only speak for myself.......... as can you...


  • Options
    #8087
    donalg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    smash wrote: »
    this interests me:





    On the Affordable Housing Scheme... let the government pay it! :D



    first people to be fined will be the TD's that are telling people not to pay.

    Really, it says if you are on the Affordable Housing Scheme you are liable to pay it so why would the Government pay it?:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #8088
    Chucky the tree
    Closed Accounts Posts: 19,341 ✭✭✭✭Chucky the tree


    sunflower27 wrote: »
    They can't just fine 'some', they have to fine everyone and there is nowhere near enough prison space or money to pay for the people in prison.

    The government know that if they start doing this then they can kiss goodbye to being in for another term. They know it and hopefully all those that haven't yet paid know it too ;)



    Of course they can just fine some. They can't haul up 1.3m people into court at the exact same time. They can't send out 1.3m summons at the same time either so obviously it needs to be staggered, and while the first poor sods are up in court a lot of others will be off down their LA or online paying up.


  • Options
    #8089
    donalg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    DerryRed wrote: »
    If they are going to put ads on the radio and leaflets through our doors claiming that this money is going towards local services, then do you not think we have a right to expect a local service like grass cutting to be included?

    Local services are services everyone can avail of not just those in your estate!! Sure maybe you will want some Council worker to come in and sow a few flowers in your garden for you while they are at it, maybe even a little vegetable patch for you to enjoy

    If you imagine the number of estates in the country at the moment, then imagine the LA's take on the responsibility of cutting the green areas in all of these estates, how long do you think it would take to cut all this grass even once? And how many people would the LA's have to hire to cut all this grass on a regular basis


  • Options
    #8090
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    prinz wrote: »
    It makes perfect sense. You know that non-contributory state pension is means tested yes?
    So she either still gets some then or they have other income.
    prinz wrote: »
    You know the contributory state pension is of no use to the thousands of women who were forced out of work back in the day because they got married? You realise there are thousands of women around the country in the same situation where they have no entitlement to a pension in their own right and are dependant on the pension of a spouse? Or are you going to say that someone who stays in the home and rears a family of kids hasn't worked hard?
    You realise you're ranting now and spouting crap and I don't really want to hear it!
    donalg1 wrote: »
    Really, it says if you are on the Affordable Housing Scheme you are liable to pay it so why would the Government pay it?:rolleyes:

    Because under that scheme, they own a percentage of the property.
    "If you sell your house within 20 years, you will have to pay the local authority a percentage of the proceeds of the sale - known as 'clawback'. This percentage is expressed as the percentage difference between the sale price and the market value of the house. This amount will be reduced by 10% each year after you have owned your home for 10 years. So, if you sell your home after 20 years, you will not have to pay any clawback to the local authority."


  • Options
    #8091
    DerryRed
    Registered Users Posts: 472 ✭✭DerryRed


    donalg1 wrote: »
    No the legislation was changed a few years ago to say that the cutting of grass or maintaining of green areas within estates will not be included in the Council's duties if the estate is taken in charge. If anything you were lucky to get a grant from the Council for this, in some estates I know they dont and never have got anything for this, instead the residents take it in turns to cut the green areas.

    Did you sign the agreement with the Council when you bought the house or with a developer?

    Right, so I sign an agreement at the time of buying which says the Council will take on this responsibility and the legislation is changed. In the meantime estates that were getting their grass cutting paid for continue to do so. If they are going to change the law they should do so consistently and not just punish those who are in the newer estates.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8092
    donalg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    smash wrote: »
    So she either still gets some then or they have other income.

    You realise you're ranting now and spouting crap and I don't really want to hear it!



    Because under that scheme, they own a percentage of the property.
    "If you sell your house within 20 years, you will have to pay the local authority a percentage of the proceeds of the sale - known as 'clawback'. This percentage is expressed as the percentage difference between the sale price and the market value of the house. This amount will be reduced by 10% each year after you have owned your home for 10 years. So, if you sell your home after 20 years, you will not have to pay any clawback to the local authority."

    And where does it say they own a percentage of your property? It is no different than a mortgage with a bank, when buying an affordable house you take out a mortgage either with a bank or with the LA itself.

    If you take out a mortgage with a bank to buy a house not under the Affordable Housing Scheme you dont think they own a percentage of your property do you?


  • Options
    #8093
    DerryRed
    Registered Users Posts: 472 ✭✭DerryRed


    donalg1 wrote: »
    Local services are services everyone can avail of not just those in your estate!! Sure maybe you will want some Council worker to come in and sow a few flowers in your garden for you while they are at it, maybe even a little vegetable patch for you to enjoy

    No need to. Concrete jungle all the way baby ;)
    donalg1 wrote: »
    If you imagine the number of estates in the country at the moment, then imagine the LA's take on the responsibility of cutting the green areas in all of these estates, how long do you think it would take to cut all this grass even once? And how many people would the LA's have to hire to cut all this grass on a regular basis

    Maybe what you're proposing isn't a bad idea. Might create some jobs for people!!! Most sense I've heard around this whole household charge discussion.

    So I'm now waiting to hear that the government are going to create a grass cutting job scheme once we all pay our household charge :)


  • Options
    #8094
    donalg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    DerryRed wrote: »
    Right, so I sign an agreement at the time of buying which says the Council will take on this responsibility and the legislation is changed. In the meantime estates that were getting their grass cutting paid for continue to do so. If they are going to change the law they should do so consistently and not just punish those who are in the newer estates.

    The Council signed an agreement to say that if you buy a house in that estate they will cut the grass, or did the developer tell you that. Who did you sign the agreement with. The developer could tell you the Council will cook you your dinner every night if and when they take it in charge doesnt make it so though.


  • Options
    #8095
    donalg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    DerryRed wrote: »
    No need to. Concrete jungle all the way baby ;)



    Maybe what you're proposing isn't a bad idea. Might create some jobs for people!!! Most sense I've heard around this whole household charge discussion.

    So I'm now waiting to hear that the government are going to create a grass cutting job scheme once we all pay our household charge :)

    So they can spend more money on public sector wages, forget about the moratorium on recruitment just so you can get your grass cut


  • Options
    #8096
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    donalg1 wrote: »
    And where does it say they own a percentage of your property? It is no different than a mortgage with a bank, when buying an affordable house you take out a mortgage either with a bank or with the LA itself.
    The clawback is there for a reason. The reason being that they've paid a percentage towards the property, which technically they own for 20 years.
    donalg1 wrote: »
    If you take out a mortgage with a bank to buy a house not under the Affordable Housing Scheme you dont think they own a percentage of your property do you?
    You must think everyone bar you is very stupid. :rolleyes: The truth is, by throwing out immature questions like that it's making you look like a complete child.


  • Options
    #8097
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    smash wrote: »
    So she either still gets some then or they have other income.

    No she doesn't. They get one pension for them both to live off.
    smash wrote: »
    You realise you're ranting now and spouting crap and I don't really want to hear it!."

    Next time don't question something you know nothing about.


  • Options
    #8098
    DerryRed
    Registered Users Posts: 472 ✭✭DerryRed


    donalg1 wrote: »
    So they can spend more money on public sector wages, forget about the moratorium on recruitment just so you can get your grass cut

    Why not? Sure we could all then go out and kick ball with our kids on the green and we'd all be much more healthier. Less money then would need to be spent on healthcare services ;)

    Everyone's a winner.


  • Options
    #8099
    smash
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,809 ✭✭✭✭smash


    prinz wrote: »
    No she doesn't. They get one pension for them both to live off.
    So then they have other forms of income or assets!
    http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/older_and_retired_people/state_pension_non_contributory.html
    prinz wrote: »
    Next time don't question something you know nothing about.

    I said "Doesn't make sense." - that's not question it, it's making a statement.


  • Options
    #8100
    lugha
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭lugha


    smash wrote: »
    That's such an arrogant and ignorant statement you know that! :rolleyes:
    It is neither arrogant nor ignorant. It is a statement of the blindingly obvious, even if many on the no side cannot see it.

    If the no campaign prevails and the government back away completely from this mode of charge then they will return to funding councils directly to the tune of 160 million.

    This is 160 million would have been used to reduce our deficit but because it has been diverted to fund councils, it must be replaced by other charges or cuts. These may take the form of greater cuts in welfare our increases in VAT / taxes and these cuts will be bourn by the taxpayer.

    Of course nobody will be told that the €10 rather than €5 taken off child benefit, or whatever, was because the housing charge did not get implemented. Some will be hit for a net amount of more than €100 and some for less than €100 but collectively the taxpayer will stump up exactly €160 million.

    So yes, you, as in you the taxpayer WILL pay! How on earth can you fail to see this?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #8101
    prinz
    Registered Users Posts: 14,598 ✭✭✭✭prinz


    smash wrote: »
    So then they have other forms of income or assets!

    Other forms of income like a pension perhaps? Like I said in the beginning? Trying to be too smart by half. Everyday on boards brings a facepalm moment and you've done it for today. Congrats.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement