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

Water Bill.

Options
1246

Comments

  • Options
    #92
    wokingvoter
    Closed Accounts Posts: 828 ✭✭✭wokingvoter


    I supported the water charges. I want clean water for my daughter, her children, her grandchildren. I thought €5 per house per week was very fair.
    I'm fully paid up but now I swear on my child's life I will never ever pay another penny for water.
    They will either come back next year and say that I have to pay because I'm enough of a mug to go to work, but the girl next door, with 2 kids on OPFP, who has just pushed her buggy past my window nursing her iPhone 6 under her chin while she lights another fag, doesn't have to.
    Or they'll put the USC up again and get it off us that way.
    There's nothing I can do about that, but I'll never pay another water bill


  • Options
    #93
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,178 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    wokingvoter wrote: »
    I supported the water charges. I want clean water for my daughter, her children, her grandchildren. I thought €5 per house per week was very fair.
    I'm fully paid up but now I swear on my child's life I will never ever pay another penny for water.
    They will either come back next year and say that I have to pay because I'm enough of a mug to go to work, but the girl next door, with 2 kids on OPFP, who has just pushed her buggy past my window nursing her iPhone 6 under her chin while she lights another fag, doesn't have to.
    Or they'll put the USC up again and get it off us that way.
    There's nothing I can do about that, but I'll never pay another water bill

    This man. Not. A. Fucking. Ha'penny.


  • Options
    #94
    rafatoni
    Registered Users Posts: 469 ✭✭rafatoni


    Deleted User wrote: »
    We still have the company and we still have the charge. I would be careful about telling people to not pay, as it may have repercussions down the road.

    IW has done great work since it was set up, despite this fact not suiting some.

    Oh you are alive.... thought you had gone missing when i saw you were MIA on the other water thread about it being scrapped.

    I was going to ring interpol :D


  • Options
    #95
    Ush1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,465 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    jimgoose wrote: »
    The fact that since the general election the majority of elected TDs are so on a platform of rejecting the water setup in it's current form, thus forcing Mad O'Duffy and his jackbooted know-it-all pals to back the fuck off if they want to see Leinster House again in the next five years. Somebody always pays one way or another - tell me about it, it's usually me and those like me. But, loud and clear, not like this.

    The elected FF TDs? Who got us in this whole mess in the first place. I'm not sure what to say really, people get the government they deserve.


  • Options
    #96
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,178 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    Ush1 wrote: »
    The elected FF TDs? Who got us in this whole mess in the first place. I'm not sure what to say really, people get the government they deserve.

    As you wish. But the dream of the ordered, "respectable" super-state built on forced labour and crippling taxes took a blow this week, from which I fervently hope it will never recover. May the road rise. :cool:


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #97
    Alf Stewart.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,789 ✭✭✭Alf Stewart.


    Anyone like myself that might have put a few bob aside "just incase" ref water charges, and the possibility of them getting it off of me legally, can now put it to better use it seems.
    Householders who did not pay water charges are unlikely to be pursued, while those that did stump up the money are set to be denied a refund.

    Existing legislation says arrears must be above €500 before a person can be taken to court, meaning non-payers are likely to escape sanction.

    Long weekend ahead...... That beer and barbecue ain't gonna pay for itself.


  • Options
    #98
    Satriale
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭Satriale


    rafatoni wrote: »
    Oh you are alive.... thought you had gone missing when i saw you were MIA on the other water thread about it being scrapped.

    I was going to ring interpol :D

    Mary was at the watch repair shop, Tick-Tock .;)


  • Options
    #99
    Jack Killian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,663 ✭✭✭Jack Killian


    OfflerCrocGod wrote: »
    The middle class will now subsidize people who waste water through reduced after tax income. The only way for you to pay less for water and sewage treatment is to earn less, the cost bears no relation to your usage. How anyone can claim that situation is rational or "fair" is beyond me.

    And yet this was the case with IW anyway, despite the false claims that it was "pay for what you use".


  • Options
    #100
    Satriale
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭Satriale


    There'll be a few threats to try and scoop up the low hanging fruit, but there wont be any pursuits, FF wont want civil disobedience, the way FG seemed to court it.

    I hope they are keeping the company name, that will help keep this mess firmly in peoples minds for the next cunning stunt they pull.


  • Options
    #101
    Broken Hearted Road
    Closed Accounts Posts: 694 ✭✭✭Broken Hearted Road


    No way should anyone be getting refunds. Did people pay their water bills on condition the money was a loan if the charges were scrapped due to the opposition of the charges.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #102
    maudgonner
    Registered Users Posts: 5,455 ✭✭✭maudgonner


    Alf Stewart. wrote: »
    Anyone like myself that might have put a few bob aside "just incase" ref water charges, and the possibility of them getting it off of me legally, can now put it to better use it seems.


    Householders who did not pay water charges are unlikely to be pursued, while those that did stump up the money are set to be denied a refund.

    Existing legislation says arrears must be above €500 before a person can be taken to court, meaning non-payers are likely to escape sanction.

    Long weekend ahead...... That beer and barbecue ain't gonna pay for itself.

    I'm sorry but that f**king sucks. (Not aiming this at you Alf. Chuck a shrimp on for me).

    They absolutely need to refund charges to those who have paid, if they're not going to impose the charges on those who haven't. Anything else would be completely immoral.

    The whole thing has been a balls up from start to finish, but this would really take the biscuit.


  • Options
    #103
    Ush1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,465 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    jimgoose wrote: »
    As you wish. But the dream of the ordered, "respectable" super-state built on forced labour and crippling taxes took a blow this week, from which I fervently hope it will never recover. May the road rise. :cool:

    Whatever you say comrade. :P


  • Options
    #104
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,178 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    maudgonner wrote: »
    I'm sorry but that f**king sucks. (Not aiming this at you Alf. Chuck a shrimp on for me).

    They absolutely need to refund charges to those who have paid, if they're not going to impose the charges on those who haven't. Anything else would be completely immoral...

    I agree. Then, the climbdown, disgrace and humiliation would be complete. :cool:


  • Options
    #105
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,178 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    Ush1 wrote: »
    Whatever you say comrade. :P

    Pretty far from "comrade" I am, chief! If I was, I'd be a fan of Big Government, rules-and-regs, taking money off decent people and pissing it away on boondoggles and buddy-buddies - sound familiar? :pac:


  • Options
    #106
    kneemos
    Registered Users Posts: 20,416 ✭✭✭✭kneemos


    Ush1 wrote: »
    What lesson? There is a commision to make a call on it in 9 months. Somebodies going to pay one way or another.


    They're not obliged to follow the commissions recommendations.


  • Options
    #107
    Jack Killian
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,663 ✭✭✭Jack Killian


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    We had this discussion on another thread and were confused as to when the fines kicked in. Is it €60 per year per bill - ie €60 x 4 or just one €60 per 12 month period. If people haven't registered or engaged with IW and the extra charge is per bill per year, they'd hit the €500 in less than a year.

    I am a supporter of the idea of water charges, so must warn people to keep in mind that the money will have to come from another source. In this case it appears to be the USC, meaning that the hard pressed middle income worker pays for all - again.

    Be honest - you're not a supporter of "the idea of water charges", because if so you'd be the same as me.

    You've defended IW to the hilt since it's inception, despite it swallowing that money from "the hard pressed middle income worker" that you're fighting on behalf of.

    Anti IW does not mean anti-charges; only the brainwashed see the two as interchangeable.


  • Options
    #108
    Satriale
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,023 ✭✭✭Satriale


    maudgonner wrote: »
    I'm sorry but that f**king sucks. (Not aiming this at you Alf. Chuck a shrimp on for me).

    They absolutely need to refund charges to those who have paid, if they're not going to impose the charges on those who haven't. Anything else would be completely immoral.

    The whole thing has been a balls up from start to finish, but this would really take the biscuit.


    I'm inclined to agree, i think it was lost on the regime and their hacks that there were a lot of people who were anti IW/water charges who paid up under the ridiculous threats from Hogan and Kelly.
    If you and your fellow payers decide to protest this i will fully support you.


    However, in this year of the anniversary of heroes, I'd urge all the people who fully supported IW and the government stance to stop whinging about money and take your beating like the True Patriots Phil Hogan titled you.


  • Options
    #109
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    Ush1 wrote: »
    I paid it because it's the law and I agree the water infrastructure needs investment.

    Also it's not gone, and you and my left numpty mate may be made to pay yet.

    So a scam is perpetrated, it's called a law and then that makes it ok?


  • Options
    #110
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,178 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    HensVassal wrote: »
    So a scam is perpetrated, it's called a law and then that makes it ok?

    But... but... that's the beauty of it. That's the whole game! :pac:


  • Options
    #111
    Ush1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,465 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    HensVassal wrote: »
    So a scam is perpetrated, it's called a law and then that makes it ok?

    What's the scam exactly?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #112
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,178 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    Satriale wrote: »
    I'm inclined to agree, i think it was lost on the regime and their hacks that there were a lot of people who were anti IW/water charges who paid up under the ridiculous threats from Hogan and Kelly.
    If you and your fellow payers decide to protest this i will fully support you....

    I'll be wallowing in it for another day or two, but after that I'll back such a thing to the hilt as well.


  • Options
    #113
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,178 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    Ush1 wrote: »
    What's the scam exactly?

    At more of a macro level, electing lawyers, doctors and schoolteachers to government who can then proceed, more-or-less unfettered, to write all kinds of crazy, dangerous and unfair "laws" designed to enrich them and their cronies.


  • Options
    #114
    Ush1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,465 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    jimgoose wrote: »
    At more of a macro level, electing lawyers, doctors and schoolteachers to government who can then proceed, more-or-less unfettered, to write all kinds of crazy, dangerous and unfair "laws" designed to enrich them and their cronies.

    It's all very nice rhetoric but this thread is about water charges.


  • Options
    #115
    diomed
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,744 ✭✭✭diomed


    jimgoose wrote: »
    At more of a macro level, electing lawyers, doctors and schoolteachers to government who can then proceed, more-or-less unfettered, to write all kinds of crazy, dangerous and unfair "laws" designed to enrich them and their cronies.
    Make a list of:
    1) crazy laws
    2) dangerous laws
    3) unfair laws

    Are "unfair laws" those where lawbreakers are caught?


  • Options
    #116
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    Ush1 wrote: »
    What's the scam exactly?

    Simply put:

    "Pay me X amount or terrible things will happen"

    Scenario 1, you obediently pay X amount and terrible things don't happen...happy days.

    Scenario 2, you don't pay X amount and terrible don't happen.

    Conclusion, scam.


  • Options
    #117
    jimgoose
    Registered Users Posts: 20,178 ✭✭✭✭jimgoose


    diomed wrote: »
    Make a list of:
    1) crazy laws
    2) dangerous laws
    3) unfair laws

    Are "unfair laws" those where lawbreakers are caught?

    Are you a schoolteacher?? Do your own homework. :D


  • Options
    #118
    Ush1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,465 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    HensVassal wrote: »
    Simply put:

    "Pay me X amount or terrible things will happen"

    Scenario 1, you obediently pay X amount and terrible things don't happen...happy days.

    Scenario 2, you don't pay X amount and terrible don't happen.

    Conclusion, scam.

    I honestly don't have a clue what you're on about. The drinking water is already terrible in certain areas, poor pressure, leaks etc...


  • Options
    #119
    HensVassal
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,570 ✭✭✭HensVassal


    Ush1 wrote: »
    I honestly don't have a clue what you're on about. The drinking water is already terrible in certain areas, poor pressure, leaks etc...

    You've been conned into paying 3 times for a commodity.


  • Options
    #120
    KomradeBishop
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,981 ✭✭✭KomradeBishop


    Having FG back in power with FF supporting, makes any future abolition of IW an utterly hollow victory.

    It's a case of the public having successfully avoided being fúcked over in a rather big way, only to return the same groups into power who will continue to screw us over in many other smaller/more-subtle cronyistic ways - and who will likely have another go at something the scale of IW again in the future, particularly the next time a big enough crisis hits.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #121
    Ush1
    Registered Users Posts: 11,465 ✭✭✭✭Ush1


    HensVassal wrote: »
    You've been conned into paying 3 times for a commodity.

    But the commodity isn't up to scratch and it's getting worse. It clearly needs investment and people don't place value on what they don't pay directly for. It's just like the waste charges all over again.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement