Phil Hogan refusing to pay property charge in Portugal.

Bullseye1

lividduck wrote: »

"Would you pay a charge if you were unhappy with the service?" asks big Phil
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/hogan-wont-pay-penthouse-charge-3067684.html

You cannot make this stuff up. Posted in AH but thought worthwhile posting here.

dunleakelleher

What day is it today?;)

The Waltzing Consumer

Bullseye1 wrote: »

You cannot make this stuff up. Posted in AH but thought worthwhile posting here.

It is probably not worth posting it here. There are plenty of people who pay management fees of thousands in apartments and housing in Ireland already and plenty who contest them. This is nothing to do with the Household charge and typical of Sindo standards.

Some management companies are very good and charge fees that reflect the true value of what they do, whilst others are pathetic and simply ripping people off.

OP, if you had an apartment and in your contract with your management company, they said they would provide "x, y and z", but did not, would you still pay in full the management fees? Or do you think you would dispute the charge?

Bullseye1

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

OP, if you had an apartment and in your contract with your management company, they said they would provide "x, y and z", but did not, would you still pay in full the management fees? Or do you think you would dispute the charge?

Yes. That is why 800,000 have refused the household charge introduction here. The services provided already are poor. Someone posted this and I think it explains my feelings on the whole proposal.

true wrote: »

Fix the bucket before you ask me to throw more water in to it.

BTW I'm not opposed to the Household tax when it's eventually introduced in 2013-2014. It makes sense that expand the tax net. But remove the waste in public spending first.

The Waltzing Consumer

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Yes. That is why 800,000 have refused the household charge introduction here. The services provided already are poor. Someone posted this and I think it explains my feelings on the whole proposal.

BTW I'm not opposed to the Household tax when it's eventually introduced in 2013-2014. It makes sense that expand the tax net. But remove the waste in public spending first.

Well it is less then 800,000 now and I say by next week, it will be less again.

Over half the people have accepted the charge and this figure will grow next week more then likely as people see the late charges. You are right about waste but the best way to change that is to vote in elections.

Bullseye1

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

You are right about waste but the best way to change that is to vote in elections.

If FF, FG and labour are not capable of removing waste who is left? It's permanent government who is responsible for waste and we don't elect these people. The only chance we have is while the IMF are in here.

The Waltzing Consumer

Bullseye1 wrote: »

If FF, FG and labour are not capable of removing waste who is left? It's permanent government who is responsible for waste and we don't elect these people. The only chance we have is while the IMF are in here.

I will have to disagree here, you may try and blame the parties in Government but at the end of the day, it si the people who put them in there and they repeatedly put FF back in Govermnment, which is a thumbs up for waste. Your anger is misdirected, it should be at the electorate, not the Government.

Howjoe1

dunleakelleher wrote: »

What day is it today?;)

it has to be made up, doesn't it?

Bullseye1

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

I will have to disagree here, you may try and blame the parties in Government but at the end of the day, it si the people who put them in there and they repeatedly put FF back in Govermnment, which is a thumbs up for waste. Your anger is misdirected, it should be at the electorate, not the Government.

High level civil servants who we do not vote for are beyond our reach no matter who we vote in. Just look at the guy FG/Labour moved over to Europe. Unless the IMF tackle these people we have no chance of proper reform. Why should these guys be protected from being fired for incompetence?

Hee Hee

Best one yet!

bijapos

Bullseye1 wrote: »

You cannot make this stuff up.

You can, someone did, and it looks like it worked.

The Waltzing Consumer

Bullseye1 wrote: »

High level civil servants who we do not vote for are beyond our reach no matter who we vote in. Just look at the guy FG/Labour moved over to Europe. Unless the IMF tackle these people we have no chance of proper reform. Why should these guys be protected from being fired for incompetence?

this is dragging topic way off now. The thread was about management fees right?

Bullseye1

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

this is dragging topic way off now. The thread was about management fees right?

I was only replying to your post about elections

Bullseye1

bijapos wrote: »

You can, someone did, and it looks like it worked.

If it is an AFJ fair play. LOL but wouldn't that be overstepping the mark?

buzz123

Bullseye1 wrote: »

You cannot make this stuff up. Posted in AH but thought worthwhile posting here.

I hate saying this but APRIL FOOLS DAY !!


Try posting a reply, over 27 likes and no published comments, no mention of it anywhere on the Net except the Indo Page, Jody up to his tricks again, I hope I'm wrong, surely they would have released this information prior to the deadline, it would have been like a Bolt of Lightning..

copacetic

The problem with an crazy baseless aprils fools in the Sindo is that there is absolutely no way to tell it apart from any other given Sunday for them.

buzz123

Bullseye1 wrote: »

You cannot make this stuff up. Posted in AH but thought worthwhile posting here.

I hate saying this but APRIL FOOLS DAY !!


Try posting a reply, over 27 likes and no published comments, no mention of it anywhere on the Net except the Indo Page, Jody up to his tricks again, I hope I'm wrong, surely they would have released this information prior to the deadline, it would have been like a BOlt of Lightning..

Wait , I take it back !!! Comments have been posted now, maybe there is some truth in this!!

Bullseye1

Someone on another board said it was reported by the Mail. I know I know. But wouldn't they and the Indo be leaving themselves open to litigation and possible action from the media ombusman?

lugha

buzz123 wrote: »

I hate saying this but APRIL FOOLS DAY !!


Try posting a reply, over 27 likes and no published comments, no mention of it anywhere on the Net except the Indo Page, Jody up to his tricks again, I hope I'm wrong, surely they would have released this information prior to the deadline, it would have been like a Bolt of Lightning..

What gave it a ring of truth for me was that that Corcoran's name is attached. This is out of sync with other AFJ that I can recall, which tend not to be credited.

Also, it was borderline inappropriate in the sense that an AFJ should not seek to influence any real issues.

I wonder if the Sindo are playing a cute game and hoping for an over-reaction from FG to this?

DarkJager

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Someone on another board said it was reported by the Mail. I know I know. But wouldn't they and the Indo be leaving themselves open to litigation and possible action from the media ombusman?

I'm thinking the same, April Fools jokes generally don't try to throw a grenade in to an already volatile issue. Reading the article, I honestly can't see anything out of place that would suggest this isn't true.

copacetic

DarkJager wrote: »

I'm thinking the same, April Fools jokes generally don't try to throw a grenade in to an already volatile issue. Reading the article, I honestly can't see anything out of place that would suggest this isn't true.

I actually agree that it isn't an Aprils Fool, whether it is 'true' or not is another thing!

It's in the Sindo, it's by Jody Corcoran, it's politically motivated and planned as part of 7 page concerted attack on FG and Denis O'Brien. Where all the main FF and O'Reilly lackeys have been told what to write yet again.

So there is probably something behind it but they'll have twisted and exaggerated the facts tabloid style.

buzz123

If it turns out to be true I won't be able to comment because there are no words that could convey my feelings, suffice it to say, a large Shredder should be wheeled into Dail Eareann and Mr Hogan should be tipped into it, Head first!

mathepac

dunleakelleher wrote: »

What day is it today?;)

Today is National Phil Hogan Day, to be memorialised in future by everyone facing Carlow-Kilkenny and giving the now-famous Two Fingers for Phillo Salute (digitally challenged voters can give the Single Centre Digit of Solidarity Salute for Centrist Shaggers).

mike65

This is actually a true story. Seriously

lugha

copacetic wrote: »

So there is probably something behind it but they'll have twisted and exaggerated the facts tabloid style.

It quite possibly is substantially as they reported it, but of course has no relevance to the household charge.

I.e. a politician in his private capacity has issues with a service being provided by private individuals. Aren't we all in the boat at one time or another.

The spurious link in really a form of word play (penthouse == house, charge == household charge). But of course such word association can have an impact. Look at the damage Sean Gallagher shipped simply by using the word "envelope".

buzz123

lugha wrote: »

It quite possibly is substantially as they reported it, but of course has no relevance to the household charge.

I.e. a politician in his private capacity has issues with a service being provided by private individuals. Aren't we all in the boat at one time or another.

The spurious link in really a form of word play (penthouse == house, charge == household charge). But of course such word association can have an impact. Look at the damage Sean Gallagher shipped simply by using the word "envelope".

It has relevance if his reason for not paying is because he isn't getting the required services for the Money/payment being sought.... Does that not ring a Bell?

thebman

Confirmed true on the Marian Finucine show just now by the guy that is on I think the editor of the Irish Independent (definitely someone that works there who is on VB sometimes as I recognise the voice).

buzz123

thebman wrote: »

Confirmed true on the Marian Finucine show just now by the guy that is on I think the editor of the Irish Independent (definitely someone that works there who is on VB sometimes as I recognise the voice).

So, let's hear the Sh1t hit the Fan now , regardless of relevance!!

The Waltzing Consumer

buzz123 wrote: »

It has relevance if his reason for not paying is because he isn't getting the required services for the Money/payment being sought.... Does that not ring a Bell?

No, it does not. Is it a charge from the Spanish Government? No.

Do we have management companies in Ireland that charge thousands a year? Yes

Do people contest those charges in certain cases? Yes

jd

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

OP, if you had an apartment and in your contract with your management company, they said they would provide "x, y and z", but did not, would you still pay in full the management fees? Or do you think you would dispute the charge?

The biggest problem Owner Management Companies have in providing services is the owners who won't pay..
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/courts/late-stars-relative-told-to-pay-8000-property-service-fees-3060020.html

".., the judge said everyone knew that service charges were necessary to cover expenses for property insurance, bin collections, fire alarms, lifts and grounds and car parking maintenance..."

buzz123

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

No, it does not. Is it a charge from the Spanish Government? No.

Do we have management companies in Ireland that charge thousands a year? Yes

Do people contest those charges in certain cases? Yes

Yeah yeah, the point I am trying to make is that he feels he requires a service for Monies paid, as do Irish Citizens irrespective of to whom the Cash is paid, either way, there are a lot of upset Stomachs at the Breakfast Tables of those who have shelled out!!

thebman

I think it is just a comical finale to a horribly mismanaged introduction of a charge and that Phil Hogans has been shown up and should be resigned to the back benches of Fine Gael and let someone younger and better move up the party.

lugha

buzz123 wrote: »

It has relevance if his reason for not paying is because he isn't getting the required services for the Money/payment being sought.... Does that not ring a Bell?

It is a normal part of haggling and bartering between private individuals to agree or not on whether agreed services have been provided for an agreed price.

Where is the precedence for a member of the public to decide that they are not getting a reasonable service for the tax they are obliged to pay?

Can I decline to pay motor tax because the roads I use in the main, are in poor condition?

Can I decline to pay income tax because I think the health service, education service etc. are not serving me well?

Our arrangement is that we elect a government over few years to oversee how our national finances are managed. If we disagree with how the manage we can fire them at the next election. To afford individual to decide for themselves if they think they are obliged to pay a tax is a recipe for disaster.

To seek to draw an analogy with the mechanics of private arrangements is spurious. Which is not to say that won’t be done to damage Hogan and may indeed be done to great effect.

The Waltzing Consumer

buzz123 wrote: »

Yeah yeah, the point I am trying to make is that he feels he requires a service for Monies paid, as do Irish Citizens irrespective of to whom the Cash is paid, either way, there are a lot of upset Stomachs at the Breakfast Tables of those who have shelled out!!

Yes, that two euro a week for local services is really horrific. As Lugha has pointed out correctly, it is normal in private agreements to haggle on service costs based on what is actually provided. But you can't have a situation where any tax brought in by the Government is argued on an individual basis, it is a recipe for madness and all the Governments money would be spent on dealing with the cases. The Government got an overwhelming mandate, if you don't like what they do, don't vote for them.

Dirk Gently

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Yes, that two euro a week for local services is really horrific. As Lugha has pointed out correctly, it is normal in private agreements to haggle on service costs based on what is actually provided. But you can't have a situation where any tax brought in by the Government is argued on an individual basis, it is a recipe for madness and all the Governments money would be spent on dealing with the cases. The Government got an overwhelming mandate, if you don't like what they do, don't vote for them.

Interesting point. Not the government mandate part as frankly we have a choice of electing who we see as least inept, not supporting anyone radically different. None of the parties are interested in reform, they all like centralised power in the cabinet. Perhaps we need to do some "haggling" with the government as change will never come from Lab/FG/FF.

I think a refusal (or threat there of) to pay tax, including sole traders and limited companies would be a worthy campaign. A campaign with a definite goal to reform politics, remove the whip system and empower local councils (a lot less of them). We need full transparency and accountability. The argument for voting for FF/FG/LAB at election time isn't valid as they have all shown unwillingness to change when in power and populism when in opposition. We wont get transparency, reform and accountability through the ballot box as the system itself is rotten to the core.

What's lacking with the household charge protest is a political goal. If we let this time of the mahon tribunal pass without forcing change (yes forcing) then we are frankly a waste of a generation.

buzz123

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Yes, that two euro a week for local services is really horrific. As Lugha has pointed out correctly, it is normal in private agreements to haggle on service costs based on what is actually provided. But you can't have a situation where any tax brought in by the Government is argued on an individual basis, it is a recipe for madness and all the Governments money would be spent on dealing with the cases. The Government got an overwhelming mandate, if you don't like what they do, don't vote for them.

I didn't vote for them so??

Why is a simple thing like fairness not obvious to you, I live in a two Bedroom kip because I tried to start a business and have lost everything, I'm not entitled to Social welfare of any kind and I have to pay €100. Or, I'm living in a 5 Bedroom House and am currently in a well paid Job with a guaranteed Pension and cannot be fired due to ineptitude because my position is protected and I pay €100 how the Hell is that fair?

Now, don't go down the route of, It's only an interim charge because a more fair and equitable Tax will be implimented next Year... If that were true, why go through all of this crap now? Why not wait till next year to do it "properly" they are collecting the most ridiculous information on the populace in order to impliment all the harsh taxes that are in the Pipe-line.

No one has adequately explained this to me and the €2 a Week crock is just not washing as a defense.

The Waltzing Consumer

buzz123 wrote: »

I didn't vote for them so??

Why is a simple thing like fairness not obvious to you, I live in a two Bedroom kip because I tried to start a business and have lost everything, I'm not entitled to Social welfare of any kind and I have to pay €100. Or, I'm living in a 5 Bedroom House and am currently in a well paid Job with a guaranteed Pension and cannot be fired due to ineptitude because my position is protected and I pay €100 how the Hell is that fair?

Now, don't go down the route of, It's only an interim charge because a more fair and equitable Tax will be implimented next Year... If that were true, why go through all of this crap now? Why not wait till next year to do it "properly" they are collecting the most ridiculous information on the populace in order to impliment all the harsh taxes that are in the Pipe-line.

No one has adequately explained this to me and the €2 a Week crock is just not washing as a defense.

Wow, settle down there. I ain't going to discuss these things with you if you take it so personally. These type of boards are for more general discussion, it kind of kills it if someone gets very personal with it.

walshb

Seems more like a passionate and enthusiastic post to me.

The Waltzing Consumer

walshb wrote: »

Seems more like a passionate and enthusiastic post to me.

But it is not objective, we don't know anything about the circumstances, we do not know income, we don't know if it is truth or lies? So how does it further the debate?

Black Swan

MOD COMMENT:
Please focus on making contributions to the thread topic, and avoid getting too personal per charter.

washman3

Originally thought (and hoped) it was an April Fools day joke.
But yet again the joke is on the Irish people.
Nothing would surprise me with this guy. He epitomises everything about the FG party. Arrogant,ignorant,swaggering bullyboy.
and the saddest thing is he is completely incompetent,but was just placed in the "soft" environmental ministry as a reward for being the party's enforcer and his loyalty to Enda/

Ellis Dee

Hogan's own version is that this is a matter of a client not being satisfied with the quality of the services he is getting from a company which is contractually obliged to provide him with satisfactory services. In Portugal, he will be able to argue the score with that contractual partner in a court of law and it will eventually be seen whether Hogan is justified in witholding payments. It sounds like the poor property-owner in Ireland who is being asked to fork out a fee to pay for local services. He often wonders "What services?", but he won't have the opportunity to bring up the quality of services in a court of law.:(

On the other hand, this may be just another example of a politician saying "Do as I say, not as I do". Such things have been known to happen.:)

jafar64

Bertie et al resigned from FF over the findings of the Mahon Tribunal. Specifically, in Ahern's case, the fact that his evidence was not credible.

Remind me again what Moriarty had to say about one P Hogan TD?

The Waltzing Consumer

jafar64 wrote: »

Bertie et al resigned from FF over the findings of the Mahon Tribunal. Specifically, in Ahern's case, the fact that his evidence was not credible.

Remind me again what Moriarty had to say about one P Hogan TD?

Okay, I will remind you, Moriarty had nothing to say about Phil Hogans evidence. It was given and it was accepted.

touts

There are lots and lots of estates around the country where the developer is still in control of the management company and is charging thousands of euro in so called management fees. The new multiunit development act is turning out to be fairly toothless as the mediation and legal options to resolve a dispute are too expensive for residents trapped in negative equity. The interesting thing is Big Phil is refusing to give councils any more money to step in and finish these estates or assist the residents in tackling the cowboy developer run management companies. Residents have to pay up for little or no services. And now it turns out Phil is in exactly the same situation in Portugal but he is refusing to pay.

john reilly

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Well it is less then 800,000 now and I say by next week, it will be less again.

Over half the people have accepted the charge and this figure will grow next week more then likely as people see the late charges. You are right about waste but the best way to change that is to vote in elections.

or maybe they were intimidated into paying.

hatrickpatrick

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Some management companies are very good and charge fees that reflect the true value of what they do, whilst others are pathetic and simply ripping people off.

So are County Councils.

OP, if you had an apartment and in your contract with your management company, they said they would provide "x, y and z", but did not, would you still pay in full the management fees? Or do you think you would dispute the charge?

So does this mean if a government or council does not stick to their manifesto, we don't have to pay taxes to them?

I like it...

hatrickpatrick

lugha wrote: »

It is a normal part of haggling and bartering between private individuals to agree or not on whether agreed services have been provided for an agreed price.

Where is the precedence for a member of the public to decide that they are not getting a reasonable service for the tax they are obliged to pay?

There's a first time for everything.

Can I decline to pay motor tax because the roads I use in the main, are in poor condition?

Can I decline to pay income tax because I think the health service, education service etc. are not serving me well?

You should be able to, it might force them to be more accountable.

Our arrangement is that we elect a government over few years to oversee how our national finances are managed. If we disagree with how the manage we can fire them at the next election.

That's not good enough, we need a way to fire them a lot faster.

To afford individual to decide for themselves if they think they are obliged to pay a tax is a recipe for disaster.

Agreed to an extent - how do you propose we keep our government on a leash if not through boycotts like these? In the current system, they only listen to us if there's an election around the corner.

To seek to draw an analogy with the mechanics of private arrangements is spurious.

Why? It's how government should be managed.

john reilly

[QUOTE=lugha;77886825]It is a normal part of haggling and bartering between private individuals to agree or not on whether agreed services have been provided for an agreed price.

Where is the precedence for a member of the public to decide that they are not getting a reasonable service for the tax they are obliged to pay?

Can I decline to pay motor tax because the roads I use in the main, are in poor condition?

Can I decline to pay income tax because I think the health service, education service etc. are not serving me well?

Our arrangement is that we elect a government over few years to oversee how our national finances are managed. If we disagree with how the manage we can fire them at the next election. To afford individual to decide for themselves if they think they are obliged to pay a tax is a recipe for disaster.

To seek to draw an analogy with the mechanics of private arrangements is spurious. Which is not to say that won’t be done to damage Hogan and may indeed be done to great effect.[/QUOTE]
nice to know what type of person we are dealing with. hope i never do any work for you and if i do remind me to overcharge you

Godge

lugha wrote: »

It is a normal part of haggling and bartering between private individuals to agree or not on whether agreed services have been provided for an agreed price.

Where is the precedence for a member of the public to decide that they are not getting a reasonable service for the tax they are obliged to pay?

Can I decline to pay motor tax because the roads I use in the main, are in poor condition?

Can I decline to pay income tax because I think the health service, education service etc. are not serving me well?

Our arrangement is that we elect a government over few years to oversee how our national finances are managed. If we disagree with how the manage we can fire them at the next election. To afford individual to decide for themselves if they think they are obliged to pay a tax is a recipe for disaster.

To seek to draw an analogy with the mechanics of private arrangements is spurious. Which is not to say that won’t be done to damage Hogan and may indeed be done to great effect.

The piece in bold is absolutely right. That is what our democracy is all about. Unfortunately, there is now a mob mentality out there that won't accept this.

hatrickpatrick

Godge wrote: »

The piece in bold is absolutely right. That is what our democracy is all about. Unfortunately, there is now a mob mentality out there that won't accept this.

Do you not see the obvious problems with this system? It means they're only accountable to us in and around elections. They have more or less carte blanche the rest of the time.
I don't see how that can accurately be described as democracy, representative or otherwise. And it's not even representative if they're not representing the people.