Water charges for excessive usage

Benedict

IW is betting all its chips on the hope that Mid-Ireland will believe that those who have no meters and who breach the quota will be fined. If MI believe that, they'll be happy and they'll pay up. That will create a money-stream, IW will be seen as a business and will be sold. Once that happens, quotas will fall and fines will rise. So if you have a second cup of tea with your breakfast, you'll be "using excessive amounts".

Once IW admit that non-metered homes will have no quota, it's "game over" for them. So they'll continue to pretend that those without meters will get caught if they use too much.

If that were true (which it isn't) why have meters at all?

InTheShadows

Benedict wrote: »

IW is betting all its chips on the hope that Mid-Ireland will believe that those who have no meters and who breach the quota will be fined. If MI believe that, they'll be happy and they'll pay up. That will create a money-stream, IW will be seen as a business and will be sold. Once that happens, quotas will fall and fines will rise. So if you have a second cup of tea with your breakfast, you'll be "using excessive amounts".

Once IW admit that non-metered homes will have no quota, it's "game over" for them. So they'll continue to pretend that those without meters will get caught if they use too much.

If that were true (which it isn't) why have meters at all?

It's utterly impossible to gauge how much someone is using without a meter. If you where stupid enough to let IW put one outside your property you are going to be fleeced it's that simple. The quota will continue to fall until having a shower is seen as a luxury and people begin to smell. The same ones who mocked the likes of myself who held the line and prevented IW from installing these cash cow devices are the ones IW are going to screw over.

Benedict

InTheShadows wrote: »

It's utterly impossible to gauge how much someone is using without a meter. If you where stupid enough to let IW put one outside your property you are going to be fleeced it's that simple. The quota will continue to fall until having a shower is seen as a luxury and people begin to smell. The same ones who mocked the likes of myself who held the line and prevented IW from installing these cash cow devices are the ones IW are going to screw over.

Just wondering how you managed to prevent them from installing a meter outside your house?

McMurphy

Benedict wrote: »

Just wondering how you managed to prevent them from installing a meter outside your house?

Doesn't affect me now as even though I'm connected to the public supply, I'm in a new build on its own land, but where I used to live - a kind of residents association was formed which actively prevented contractors from installing meters in the estate.

This wasn't a working class area either, the group consisted mainly of retired people and shift workers etc.

Turns out they were correct in their actions in the long run.

Benedict

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Doesn't affect me now as even though I'm connected to the public supply, I'm in a new build on its own land, but where I used to live - a kind of residents association was formed which actively prevented contractors from installing meters in the estate.

This wasn't a working class area either, the group consisted mainly of retired people and shift workers etc.

Turns out they were correct in their actions in the long run.

The people who prevented installation seemed to be burly muscular men who were able to pick up and remove heavy barriers etc. It would be hard for pensioners to use physical force - so how did they prevent installation?
Those people who did prevent installation are now over the moon that they did so.

Plumbthedepths

Benedict wrote: »

The people who prevented installation seemed to be burly muscular men who were able to pick up and remove heavy barriers etc. It would be hard for pensioners to use physical force - so how did they prevent installation?
Those people who did prevent installation are now over the moon that they did so.

I'm neither burly or a thug. I bought a very cheap car and parked it over the stopcock. Job done no meter.

McMurphy

Benedict wrote: »

The people who prevented installation seemed to be burly muscular men who were able to pick up and remove heavy barriers etc.

Not around this way they weren't. Seems very stereotypical imo.

It would be hard for pensioners to use physical force - so how did they prevent installation?
Those people who did prevent installation are now over the moon that they did so.

Just civil disobedience, as above refuse permission to access some areas, cars parked, congregation in certain areas.

The mass protestations seen throughout the state, especially in Dublin city centre didn't contain too many burly muscular men either, there's power in numbers.

Benedict

Johnny Dogs wrote: »

Not around this way they weren't. Seems very stereotypical imo.


Just civil disobedience, as above refuse permission to access some areas, cars parked, congregation in certain areas.

The mass protestations seen throughout the state, especially in Dublin city centre didn't contain too many burly muscular men either, there's power in numbers.

Apologies, didn't mean to stereotype anyone. I just saw some clips on Youtube with people lifting up barriers and they looked very strong - but I didn't mean to suggest anything derogatory at all.

Benedict

Quote from Money Guide Ireland. "Those households who are identified as using water above the annual threshold will be notified . They will then be given a six month period during which they can try to reduce their water usage. If they haven’t done that by the end of the six months they will then be charged for any usage above the threshold for that six month period and any ongoing usage over the threshold."

The same site gives an example of "making daily use of a washing machine, having daily baths or daily use of a power shower" as being the most likely to be receiving bills.

BUT...BUT...BUT! Got no meter installed? Then no problem. Only those with meters (and who take cleanliness seriously) will need to be reaching for their cheque-books.

Brendan Bendar

Benedict wrote: »

Quote from Money Guide Ireland. "Those households who are identified as using water above the annual threshold will be notified . They will then be given a six month period during which they can try to reduce their water usage. If they haven’t done that by the end of the six months they will then be charged for any usage above the threshold for that six month period and any ongoing usage over the threshold."

The same site gives an example of "making daily use of a washing machine, having daily baths or daily use of a power shower" as being the most likely to be receiving bills.

BUT...BUT...BUT! Got no meter installed? Then no problem. Only those with meters (and who take cleanliness seriously) will need to be reaching for their cheque-books.

Won’t be reaching for anything dude.

Level playing field, meters for all, meters for none.

It’s that simple, Middle Ireland won’t be stiffed twice.

Benedict

In many cases, entire streets - even entire estates - refused to allow meter installation. Homeowners stood outside their gates and prevented the workmen from carrying out installations. They did this because they genuinely believed that water charges were yet another rip-off. IW lost the war and walked away with its tail between its legs.

Before long, IW took a decision to stop installing water meters altogether so that even those who were willing to accept them, didn't get them. We don't know why they stopped. Perhaps they just got tired of all the hassle and decided they had better things to be doing.

Metering apartments was a non-starter from day one because IW couldn't figure out a way of deciding which apartment in a block was using too much if the whole block was going over quota. So if you live in an apartment, congrats! You can leave the taps on all night without any penalties.

And what about the houses with no meters? We're supposed to believe that IW will have inspectors creeping around estates looking for homes "suspected" of using too much. (So if you see a strange face at your kitchen window some night, it could be in inspector looking for a "suspect".)

If you're a "suspect", they'll install a meter - and this time maybe they'll bring the riot squad so unlike last time, they can't be stopped.

And if they can't install the meter, they'll install a "flow measuring device" - which, by the way, is a meter.

And what if you're No 397 and Nos 1 to 296 have no meters? And you're a "suspect"?

That'll be a heck of a lot of piping to nab one "suspect" (who may turn out to be not guilty).

Realistically, those with meters will be expected to subsidise those without meters.

So if you have a meter and you refuse to pay if you go over the quota, you're not a sponger. It's just that you want fair play!

Brendan Bendar

Benedict wrote: »

In many cases, entire streets - even entire estates - refused to allow meter installation. Homeowners stood outside their gates and prevented the workmen from carrying out installations. They did this because they genuinely believed that water charges were yet another rip-off. IW lost the war and walked away with its tail between its legs.

Before long, IW took a decision to stop installing water meters altogether so that even those who were willing to accept them, didn't get them. We don't know why they stopped. Perhaps they just got tired of all the hassle and decided they had better things to be doing.

Metering apartments was a non-starter from day one because IW couldn't figure out a way of deciding which apartment in a block was using too much if the whole block was going over quota. So if you live in an apartment, congrats! You can leave the taps on all night without any penalties.

And what about the houses with no meters? We're supposed to believe that IW will have inspectors creeping around estates looking for homes "suspected" of using too much. (So if you see a strange face at your kitchen window some night, it could be in inspector looking for a "suspect".)

If you're a "suspect", they'll install a meter - and this time maybe they'll bring the riot squad so unlike last time, they can't be stopped.

And if they can't install the meter, they'll install a "flow measuring device" - which, by the way, is a meter.

And what if you're No 397 and Nos 1 to 296 have no meters? And you're a "suspect"?

That'll be a heck of a lot of piping to nab one "suspect" (who may turn out to be not guilty).

Realistically, those with meters will be expected to subsidise those without meters.

So if you have a meter and you refuse to pay if you go over the quota, you're not a sponger. It's just that you want fair play!

Lookit, one can button this up any which way but loose, but the bottom line is:

Middle Ireland won’t be stiffed twice, make no mistake about that.

It’s meters for everyone, or meters for no one, this one will not fly, not a chance in hell and anyone who pays whatever they determine is a total fool.

Not going to get off the ground.

Plumbthedepths

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Lookit, one can button this up any which way but loose, but the bottom line is:

Middle Ireland won’t be stiffed twice, make no mistake about that.

It’s meters for everyone, or meters for no one, this one will not fly, not a chance in hell and anyone who pays whatever they determine is a total fool.

Not going to get off the ground.

You and everyone who has a meter will be charged make no mistake about it. Your ranting here means zero. ;-)

Brendan Bendar

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

You and everyone who has a meter will be charged make no mistake about it. Your ranting here means zero. ;-)

Ranting!!!!!

Of course folk can be charged, but I’m telling you, buddy, charged is one thing, payment is another.

MI won’t be stiffed again, pal, just make a note of that.

Plumbthedepths

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Ranting!!!!!

Of course folk can be charged, but I’m telling you, buddy, charged is one thing, payment is another.

MI won’t be stiffed again, pal, just make a note of that.

Civil debt bill will deal with non payment. Btw who appointed you as the spokesperson for MI?

Brendan Bendar

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Civil debt bill will deal with non payment. Btw who appointed you as the spokesperson for MI?

Excellent, let’s try and test that one out.

Self appointed, and will remain so unless deposed.

Benedict

IW have been clever. They've kept the militants happy by giving them an amnesty. So the only people who will get bills are so-called "respectable" white collar citizens who will pay up - even though it's not fair to make one half of the IW customers pay while the other half get off scot-free..
If teachers or a Gardaí get a threat of court action, they'll be afraid to challenge it because they won't want their names in the paper.


IW know they'll pay up rather than risk appearing in court.

So I think that Plumthedepths may just be correct!

Brendan Bendar

Benedict wrote: »

IW have been clever. They've kept the militants happy by giving them an amnesty. So the only people who will get bills are so-called "respectable" white collar citizens who will pay up - even though it's not fair to make one half of the IW customers pay while the other half get off scot-free..
If teachers or a Gardaí get a threat of court action, they'll be afraid to challenge it because they won't want their names in the paper.


IW know they'll pay up rather than risk appearing in court.

So I think that Plumthedepths may just be correct!

I dont think so Mr Bee. Normally he would be but not this time.

Lookit, Middle Ireland played ball last time, they saw the reasoning, widen the tax base.... allow investment off balance sheet, pay for a treated product.... yada yada yada.....and what happened...... we.....were.....STIFFED.

Made fools of, held up to ridicule, made look like idiots....for sure.


We will not be stiffed twice, anyone who accepts the system of ‘meter houses’ paying, and the rest running the taps for free is a gold plated idiot.

Won’t happen, make no mistake about that, my friend.

Benedict

There will be a lack of public support for those who go over the quota and have to pay a fine. The argument will be "Just don't go over the quota and you'll be grand". Even some well known radio commentators have been saying this.

The point is that half the IW will be fined for over-use and the other half won't.

If you have to use a stop-watch when having a power-shower then fine. But it's not fine if you're the only eejit on the road who has to use a stop-watch!

Brendan Bendar

Benedict wrote: »

There will be a lack of public support for those who go over the quota and have to pay a fine. The argument will be "Just don't go over the quota and you'll be grand". Even some well known radio commentators have been saying this.

The point is that half the IW will be fined for over-use and the other half won't.

If you have to use a stop-watch when having a power-shower then fine. But it's not fine if you're the only eejit on the road who has to use a stop-watch!

No my friend, they’ll be no stop watches, no devices, no Mexican showers, no arse-boxing around this one.

Middle Ireland was stiffed once, won’t be stiffed twice.

Anyone who stands up to these tools would be a hero.


‘Meter for all or meter for none’

No two tier administration....... won’t happen,my friend.

Would be like expecting compliant vehicle owners who pay their tax to be under certain laws whilst those who don’t bother to be totally immune!!!


C’mon, my friend, any party who stood behind that rubbish would be decimated and rightly so, apart from the legality issue.

Will. Not. Happen

Benedict

The reason that there are no further contributions to this thread is probably down to the fact that most people are now convinced that the IW plan is dead in the water. The notion that one half of IW would have to stick to a quota or pay a fine while the other half wouldn't is simply not sustainable and would be challenged in the courts if they tried to enforce it.


The suggestion that inspectors would be prowling around un-metered homes looking for "suspects" to pounce on because they suspect they are over-using water is like something from a Monty Python movie.


IW need to tear up this stupid plan, toss it in the nearest bin and try to think of a new plan which is fair and treats all customers equally.

Brendan Bendar

Benedict wrote: »

The reason that there are no further contributions to this thread is probably down to the fact that most people are now convinced that the IW plan is dead in the water. The notion that one half of IW would have to stick to a quota or pay a fine while the other half wouldn't is simply not sustainable and would be challenged in the courts if they tried to enforce it.


The suggestion that inspectors would be prowling around un-metered homes looking for "suspects" to pounce on because they suspect they are over-using water is like something from a Monty Python movie.


IW need to tear up this stupid plan, toss it in the nearest bin and try to think of a new plan which is fair and treats all customers equally.

Correct Mr B, there is absolutely noooooooooo way people will stand for a ‘scheme’ like that.

It is indeed stupid and unworkable and to think that only those with meters would be ‘liable’ for potential charges is laughable.

This. One. Won’t. Run.

Idbatterim

they should start putting the meters back in to non metered properties. Or do like they do in the uk, dont want a meter, you pay higher than a metered household those. If another recession comes and we need a bail out, I hope this would be a prerequisite to us getting a red cent!

What will all the irish water warriors do then? Hmmm, 10c a day on water or E203 for scratching my ass, will be a tough choice for them!

Brendan Bendar

Batter, you make good points there.

One thing though you would want to copper fasten payment methods for those who don’t want meters,no auld coming the ‘auld soldier’ and nod and wink stuff.


any idea how that aspect of payment is managed in the UK?

Benedict

The following is a quote from TODAY'S Irish Independent:

"In the coming weeks, Irish Water will begin monitoring households with a view to identifying 'water wasters'.

They will be liable for bills of up to €500 a year if they don't take action to reduce their usage."

Note they say "households" and not "metered households" and there has been an acceptance that the quota will probably be reduced over time.

This clearly shows that IW is preparing to press ahead with plans to impose a quota and possibly fines on one half of its users while ignoring the other half.

There is a real showdown coming down the tracks.

Watch this space.

Brendan Bendar

Benedict wrote: »

The following is a quote from TODAY'S Irish Independent:

"In the coming weeks, Irish Water will begin monitoring households with a view to identifying 'water wasters'.

They will be liable for bills of up to €500 a year if they don't take action to reduce their usage."

Note they say "households" and not "metered households" and there has been an acceptance that the quota will probably be reduced over time.

This clearly shows that IW is preparing to press ahead with plans to impose a quota and possibly fines on one half of its users while ignoring the other half.

There is a real showdown coming down the tracks.

Watch this space.

Locked and loaded,Mr Bee, locked and loaded.

Brendan Bendar

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/environment/water_services/water_charges.html

Worth a read.

_Kaiser_

FG apparently going all out on ensuring they won't be back in Government next year.

Interestingly there's an article yesterday that says Noonan warned against water charges in 2014, but was overruled by Enda :

http://www.breakingnews.ie/ireland/book-reveals-former-finance-minister-opposed-water-meters-but-was-overruled-by-enda-kenny-953515.html

Benedict

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/environment/water_services/water_charges.html

Worth a read.

Quote from Citizens' Information site: "If your property does not have a meter and is suspected of excess use, Irish Water may seek to install a meter or calculate your usage using alternative technology"

The legality of coming charges depends totally on customers believing this. But look a bit closer. There are entire estates without a single meter installed. What will trigger IW "suspicions" that No 159 is going over the quota? Clean car? Kids look clean? Family with unusually clean clothes? And if they find a "suspect", they'll put in a meter. But they were stopped installing it first time - so what makes them think the home owner will allow them this time. So then they'll use "alternative technology". So what does that mean exactly? And things get even more farcical when you remember that IW don't install meters anymore. They've given that up as a bad job - oh sorry! Unless they identify a "suspect". And even if they nab all the "suspects", it's still unfair because tens of thousand of apartment occupiers won't be charged even if they run laundrettes from their bedrooms.
So really, IW need to stop this now and think of a plan that won't be challenged.
This one is daft.

K.Flyer

Again this plan by I.W. is so flawed. It discriminates between people in houses and people in apartments.
If there is a meter fitted on the supply to a typical apartment block which averages high consumption due to usage or leaking taps etc, there is almost SFA they will or can do to figure out the culprit(s).
So they will move on to the houses, the low hanging easy pickings, and pursue them instead.

Irish Water are chancers and charlatans of the highest order. Another quango with outrageous salaries and severance deals.

They either meter every single property on I.W. supply or F.R.O. with their alternative hare brained ideas.