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

272 people

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    generalmental
    Registered Users Posts: 485 ✭✭generalmental


    cloudatlas wrote: »
    I wish people would quit using the lazy banker argument. 'Joe, <insert thing that happened> but the bankers aren't in jail!!!!', rabble rabble. Bankers behaviour wasn't a joke in the good times in fact that kind of greed was championed. Greed and huge pay packets was only vilified when they failed.

    Im sorry but i dont see it that way. They are a citizen of this country and that means they have to abide the laws just like everyone else. If they break the law they should be punished in the same way as everyone else


  • Options
    #33
    donegal_road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,281 ✭✭✭donegal_road


    this is one of the more ludicrous sentences every handed down by an Irish court
    A LOCAL authority has washed its hands of the imprisonment of three men who left rubbish at a recycling bank, saying the decision was "a matter for the courts".

    All three men were jailed for non-payment of litter fines after leaving items at a bottle bank outside a supermarket in Ashbourne, Co Meath.

    In a statement yesterday, Meath County Council said they implemented the provisions of the Litter Pollution Act 1997 and "persons who are caught littering are issued with a fine or fines as appropriate".

    "If this fine is not paid it is followed by a warning letter. If the fine is still not paid, the matter is referred to the council's legal advisers in order to pursue same through the courts."

    It said that if the court decided the fine should stand -- or decided to increase the fine -- then the money is pursued by the courts service.

    The three men contacted RTE's 'Liveline' yesterday to speak of their experiences.

    One man, named Stephen, said he had spent much of Wednesday incarcerated in Wheatfield Prison for non-payment of the fine after leaving a box outside a recycling bank at Supervalu in Ashbourne, Co Meath.

    He was freed after his mother made an emotional appeal on his behalf on 'Liveline' and his father made a donation of €200 towards his fine.

    Prosecuted

    Two other men were also put in prison for non-payments of fines at the same location and all were prosecuted in the space of a few months, on foot of CCTV footage taken from the scene.

    Another of the men, named Chris, said he was jailed for his failure to pay a litter fine after his 12-year-old son left a crumpled plastic bag at the bottle bank after disposing of the contents.

    "In my experience it was a totally nonsensical thing to do," he said of the decision to imprison him.


    *Is it true that it costs the taxpayer €2000 per week to keep someone in prison in Ireland? or did I dream it....


  • Options
    #34
    0066ad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 314 ✭✭0066ad


    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    You cannot be jailed for not having a TV licence, you can only be fined.

    Penalties

    Conviction for non-payment of a television licence (first offence) is a fine of up to €1,000.

    If you are convicted a second time or more for not paying your television licence, you will be fined up to €2,000.

    I suppose that is ok then, if they haven't got the 180 euro to pay for the tv license we will fine them 1,000 euro, do you seriously think someone who hasn't got the 180 euro is going to be able to pay the 1,000 euro fine?


  • Options
    #35
    generalmental
    Registered Users Posts: 485 ✭✭generalmental


    Duggy747 wrote: »
    Charge Google / Big Players high corp tax.

    Google / Big Players leave.

    People then complain that government isn't doing enough to get or keep big companies in the country to stop thousands of people being laid off.

    You dont have to charge there companies a high tax rate but maybe we could al least charge them the 12.5% that the government is saying they charge


  • Options
    #36
    seanm92
    Closed Accounts Posts: 152 ✭✭seanm92


    0066ad wrote: »
    I suppose that is ok then, if they haven't got the 180 euro to pay for the tv license we will fine them 1,000 euro, do you seriously think someone who hasn't got the 180 euro is going to be able to pay the 1,000 euro fine?

    Maybe they shouldn't have a TV in that case, if they haven't €180 to spare they should possibly not even buy the TV and spend the money elsewhere. In my experience it seems that rather than not having the money to pay the licence fee, they couldn't be bothered in many cases.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Paddy Cow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,576 ✭✭✭Paddy Cow


    The tv license is nothing more than a government sanctioned protection racket. Pay €160 every year for a service that you may or may not use or face a fine and possible jail. At least the BBC have the good grace not to take the p!ss by having loads of ads. I live on my own and have no need for tv but because I have a laptop I still have to pay it. I don't listen to the radio either. Why don't RTE make the license optional? If you use Sky or UPC, why can't you opt for a package that doesn't include any RTE channels? Because they would lose too much money.

    Does anyone know what the license is supposed to be for? I mean I can understand having a license for your dog but it's not like the tv is in danger of jumping the wall and attacking the neighbour's children. Does it serve a real purpose? I don't accept that it's to fund either radio or tv programmes, as plenty of non RTE channels manage to survive.


  • Options
    #38
    Paddy Cow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,576 ✭✭✭Paddy Cow


    seanm92 wrote: »
    Maybe they shouldn't have a TV in that case, if they haven't €180 to spare they should possibly not even buy the TV and spend the money elsewhere. In my experience it seems that rather than not having the money to pay the licence fee, they couldn't be bothered in many cases.
    It doesn't matter if you don't have a tv. If you have a radio or laptop or many other devices you have to pay it. Apparently even if you have a tv in your house which you don't use (I have one gathering dust which I want to get rid of but no one will take because it's an old piece of junk), you still have to pay.


  • Options
    #39
    seanm92
    Closed Accounts Posts: 152 ✭✭seanm92


    Paddy Cow wrote: »
    It doesn't matter if you don't have a tv. If you have a radio or laptop or many other devices you have to pay it. Apparently even if you have a tv in your house which you don't use (I have one gathering dust which I want to get rid of but no one will take because it's an old piece of junk), you still have to pay.

    You don't have to pay for a radio, its only for devices capable of receiving a television signal according to citizens information at least, although I'm open to correction on that. I know about the laptop but the point I'm making is that how can someone be able to buy a laptop, TV etc. and not be able to pay the licence???


  • Options
    #40
    dxhound2005
    Registered Users Posts: 20,758 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    Paddy Cow wrote: »
    It doesn't matter if you don't have a tv. If you have a radio or laptop or many other devices you have to pay it. Apparently even if you have a tv in your house which you don't use (I have one gathering dust which I want to get rid of but no one will take because it's an old piece of junk), you still have to pay.

    There is no need for a licence if you only have a radio.


  • Options
    #41
    0066ad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 314 ✭✭0066ad


    seanm92 wrote: »
    Maybe they shouldn't have a TV in that case, if they haven't €180 to spare they should possibly not even buy the TV and spend the money elsewhere. In my experience it seems that rather than not having the money to pay the licence fee, they couldn't be bothered in many cases.


    Maybe they had a tv license in the better times and didn't think they would lose their jobs and not be able to afford one in the future, what are those people suppose to say to their kids? sorry you can't watch your tv shows any more I have to throw the telly out the window because I can't pay tubbers wages anymore.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    withless
    Registered Users Posts: 8,741 ✭✭✭withless


    If anyone has that tv spongers ad with the sponge and the washing line please post it.

    IT SCARED THE BEJAYSUS OUT OF ME WHEN I WAS A YOUNGFELLA


  • Options
    #43
    0066ad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 314 ✭✭0066ad


    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    There is no need for a licence if you only have a radio.

    Will do soon, when it is the broad casting tax.


  • Options
    #44
    Paddy Cow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,576 ✭✭✭Paddy Cow


    seanm92 wrote: »
    You don't have to pay for a radio, its only for devices capable of receiving a television signal according to citizens information at least, although I'm open to correction on that. I know about the laptop but the point I'm making is that how can someone be able to buy a laptop, TV etc. and not be able to pay the licence???
    A tv or laptop is a one off expense. I saved for ages to get my laptop and bought it when I was able to afford it. The license is every fecking year and not something you can put on the back burner if you are a bit strapped for cash.
    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    There is no need for a licence if you only have a radio.
    I stand corrected.


  • Options
    #45
    seanm92
    Closed Accounts Posts: 152 ✭✭seanm92


    0066ad wrote: »
    Maybe they had a tv license in the better times and didn't think they would lose their jobs and not be able to afford one in the future, what are those people suppose to say to their kids? sorry you can't watch your tv shows any more I have to throw the telly out the window because I can't pay tubbers wages anymore.

    Correct me if I'm wrong but do social welfare recipients not receive money toward a tv licence or receive one for free??


  • Options
    #46
    seanm92
    Closed Accounts Posts: 152 ✭✭seanm92


    Paddy Cow wrote: »
    A tv or laptop is a one off expense. I saved for ages to get my laptop and bought it when I was able to afford it. The license is every fecking year and not something you can put on the back burner if you are a bit strapped for cash.

    That's fair enough and I can understand that its not a once off thing, but it can be paid over the year AFAIK. I'm not a fan of the TV licence myself, but I just cant stand some of the moaning that some are doing about being fined for not paying it when it is the law of the country.


  • Options
    #47
    SB2013
    Closed Accounts Posts: 805 ✭✭✭SB2013


    generalmental wrote: »
    Yes they probably were jailed for not paying the fine that was given to them for not paying their tv license.

    I think you'll find it refers to penal warrants executed. The person could already be in prison when the warrant is executed. They could be lodged on more than one warrant of which the tv licence one is the shortest one. I think you'll find very few, if any, are put in prison for not paying a court fine for not having a tv licence. Those that are might as well be on a tour of the prison for all the time they spend there.


  • Options
    #48
    0066ad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 314 ✭✭0066ad


    seanm92 wrote: »
    Correct me if I'm wrong but do social welfare recipients not receive money toward a tv licence or receive one for free??

    That is a myth you probably heard here on boards, just think about this is 272 people who now have a conviction on their record for non payment of a fine simply because they haven't got the money to pay the fat cats in rte wages.


  • Options
    #49
    Paddy Cow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,576 ✭✭✭Paddy Cow


    seanm92 wrote: »
    That's fair enough and I can understand that its not a once off thing, but it can be paid over the year AFAIK. I'm not a fan of the TV licence myself, but I just cant stand some of the moaning that some are doing about being fined for not paying it when it is the law of the country.
    I don't have blind respect for the law. Many laws are ridiculously archaic and I think the tv license is one of them. No one has ever been able to explain to me why we have it apart from "it's the law". RTE is not a service that we need like water or bin collection and if people want to pay for it, that should be their perogative, not something they are forced to do under threat of fines and/or prison.


  • Options
    #50
    seanm92
    Closed Accounts Posts: 152 ✭✭seanm92


    0066ad wrote: »
    That is a myth you probably heard here on boards, just think about this is 272 people who now have a conviction on their record for non payment of a fine simply because they haven't got the money to pay the fat cats in rte wages.

    No I didn't read on here, It seems that although not everyone on social welfare is entitled to one, some are though so I wouldn't call it a myth at the same time.

    If they do that's their own fault really, I honestly couldn't care less to be honest, it is after all their choice not to pay. I can't stand the constant whinging from some who don't pay when they get caught. They're fully aware of what can happen if they don't pay the fee.


  • Options
    #51
    seanm92
    Closed Accounts Posts: 152 ✭✭seanm92


    Paddy Cow wrote: »
    I don't have blind respect for the law. Many laws are ridiculously archaic and I think the tv license is one of them. No one has ever been able to explain to me why we have it apart from "it's the law". RTE is not a service that we need like water or bin collection and if people want to pay for it, that should be their perogative, not something they are forced to do under threat of fines and/or prison.

    Likewise, owning a TV is not a necessity though.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Paddy Cow
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,576 ✭✭✭Paddy Cow


    seanm92 wrote: »
    Likewise, owning a TV is not a necessity though.
    You could argue that neither is a washing machine, microwave, fridge, hoover etc but would you be happy to pay a license fee every year to own one if they introduced it, simply because it's the law?.


  • Options
    #53
    kowloon
    Registered Users Posts: 13,364 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    Paddy Cow wrote: »
    You could argue that neither is a washing machine, microwave, fridge, hoover etc but would you be happy to pay a license fee every year to own one if they introduced it, simply because it's the law?.

    SSssshhh! They'll hear you!


  • Options
    #54
    0066ad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 314 ✭✭0066ad


    seanm92 wrote: »
    That's fair enough and I can understand that its not a once off thing, but it can be paid over the year AFAIK. I'm not a fan of the TV licence myself, but I just cant stand some of the moaning that some are doing about being fined for not paying it when it is the law of the country.


    It's not the law of the land it is contract that RTE tries to get everybody to oblige to, that is why they need your name and send around the heavies to intimate and frighten the frail for their names.

    The last time they were in my area was the week before christmas you have to have a special kind of asshole to go around and threaten people with fines and court appearances at that time of year.


  • Options
    #55
    seanm92
    Closed Accounts Posts: 152 ✭✭seanm92


    Paddy Cow wrote: »
    You could argue that neither is a washing machine, microwave, fridge, hoover etc but would you be happy to pay a license fee every year to own one if they introduced it, simply because it's the law?.

    Wouldn't be thrilled about paying it alright, I'll admit that. But your comparison is ridiculous IMO. How are those items comparable to a television??? They are all necessary for most people, a TV is for entertainment purposes and as such I would deem it discretionary rather than an essential item.

    A closer comparison would maybe be a car, for which we pay a motor tax as well as being required to pay insurance. As I've previously stated I'd rather not have to pay a television licence but since we do, I do pay mine.

    If you do happen to get caught, that's a risk you take, like it or not. What bothers me most is people moaning about bankers, and this that and the other whenever something like this comes up, as if they're some kind of victim, the only victims in this are the people who pay their licence, which no doubt is inflated by the many people who refuse to pay, and consequently, the costs of prosecuting these people IMO.


  • Options
    #56
    Flimbos
    Registered Users Posts: 642 ✭✭✭Flimbos


    The TV licence is such an out-dated tax, as most people in Ireland with a TV will be using it mostly for non-RTE channels, or DVDs, or playing their Xbox.

    What I think should be done... Either...

    1) Scrap the licence, and sell RTE (unlikely, but my first choice).

    2) Reduce the licence fee, and reduce the cost of running RTE (they are living in a bubble out in Montrose).

    3) If we really must pay the fee, just scrap the licence, and stick a levy on the ESB bill, or Sky/UPC. At least this will save taxpayers from paying for inspectors, and those ridiculous TV/radio ads, as well as the rest of the TV licence industry behind the scenes.

    4) If we must maintain the status quo, don't give people a criminal record or send them to jail. Community service would be the lesser of two evils here.


  • Options
    #57
    seanm92
    Closed Accounts Posts: 152 ✭✭seanm92


    0066ad wrote: »
    It's not the law of the land it is contract that RTE tries to get everybody to oblige to, that is why they need your name and send around the heavies to intimate and frighten the frail for their names.

    The last time they were in my area was the week before christmas you have to have a special kind of asshole to go around and threaten people with fines and court appearances at that time of year.

    Cant claim to know the ins and outs of this completely, but if it is a contract then it is governed by Irish contract law.

    I see where you're coming from about the Christmas thing alright, but these people probably don't have a choice if they want to keep their jobs. After all they're paid to do this year round, not when it suits


  • Options
    #58
    EoghanIRL
    Registered Users Posts: 4,080 ✭✭✭EoghanIRL


    orestes wrote: »
    But according to some of the folks on here you get to watch all the tv you want in prison, so they're really winning in the long run. Well played.

    And free electricity .


  • Options
    #59
    dxhound2005
    Registered Users Posts: 20,758 ✭✭✭✭dxhound2005


    0066ad wrote: »
    It's not the law of the land it is contract that RTE tries to get everybody to oblige to, that is why they need your name and send around the heavies to intimate and frighten the frail for their names.

    The last time they were in my area was the week before christmas you have to have a special kind of asshole to go around and threaten people with fines and court appearances at that time of year.

    If it's not the law of the land then what is this about?

    http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/NR/rdonlyres/DE7C0393-76C1-42A5-A176-88C512F7AB9C/0/BroadcastingAct2009.pdf

    142.—(1) Subject to the exceptions mentioned in subsection (3), a
    person shall not keep or have in his or her possession anywhere in
    the territory of the State a television set save in so far as such keeping
    or possession is authorised by a television licence for the time being
    in force.


    148.—A person who keeps, has in his or her possession or uses a
    television set in contravention of section 142 commits an offence and
    is liable on summary conviction—
    (a) in the case of a first such offence, to a fine not exceeding
    €1,000, and
    (b) in the case of a second or subsequent such offence, to a
    fine not exceeding €2,000.


  • Options
    #60
    feargale
    Registered Users Posts: 8,636 ✭✭✭feargale


    donegal_road wrote: »
    this is one of the more ludicrous sentences every handed down by an Irish court
    Quote:

    A LOCAL authority has washed its hands of the imprisonment of three men who left rubbish at a recycling bank, saying the decision was "a matter for the courts".

    All three men were jailed for non-payment of litter fines after leaving items at a bottle bank outside a supermarket in Ashbourne, Co Meath.

    In a statement yesterday, Meath County Council said they implemented the provisions of the Litter Pollution Act 1997 and "persons who are caught littering are issued with a fine or fines as appropriate".

    "If this fine is not paid it is followed by a warning letter. If the fine is still not paid, the matter is referred to the council's legal advisers in order to pursue same through the courts."

    It said that if the court decided the fine should stand -- or decided to increase the fine -- then the money is pursued by the courts service.

    The three men contacted RTE's 'Liveline' yesterday to speak of their experiences.

    One man, named Stephen, said he had spent much of Wednesday incarcerated in Wheatfield Prison for non-payment of the fine after leaving a box outside a recycling bank at Supervalu in Ashbourne, Co Meath.

    He was freed after his mother made an emotional appeal on his behalf on 'Liveline' and his father made a donation of €200 towards his fine.

    Prosecuted

    Two other men were also put in prison for non-payments of fines at the same location and all were prosecuted in the space of a few months, on foot of CCTV footage taken from the scene.

    Another of the men, named Chris, said he was jailed for his failure to pay a litter fine after his 12-year-old son left a crumpled plastic bag at the bottle bank after disposing of the contents.

    "In my experience it was a totally nonsensical thing to do," he said of the decision to imprison him.



    *Is it true that it costs the taxpayer €2000 per week to keep someone in prison in Ireland? or did I dream it....
    Did the men go to court and give their story?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    0066ad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 314 ✭✭0066ad


    dxhound2005 wrote: »
    If it's not the law of the land then what is this about?

    http://www.dcenr.gov.ie/NR/rdonlyres/DE7C0393-76C1-42A5-A176-88C512F7AB9C/0/BroadcastingAct2009.pdf

    142.—(1) Subject to the exceptions mentioned in subsection (3), a
    person shall not keep or have in his or her possession anywhere in
    the territory of the State a television set save in so far as such keeping
    or possession is authorised by a television licence for the time being
    in force.


    148.—A person who keeps, has in his or her possession or uses a
    television set in contravention of section 142 commits an offence and
    is liable on summary conviction—
    (a) in the case of a first such offence, to a fine not exceeding
    €1,000, and
    (b) in the case of a second or subsequent such offence, to a
    fine not exceeding €2,000.


    Those are acts not law.


Advertisement