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 charges for excessive usage

Options
1…4647495152…85

Comments

  • Options
    #1442
    charlie14
    Registered Users Posts: 14,915 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Much of what has been going on in this thread of late is more light entertainment than anything to do with the title.

    So back to the subject.
    Anyone who is genuinely worried about having to pay for use over their allocation, my advice for what it is worth is if IW contact you, just ignore them.
    That was what killed their metering planes. People refused to "engage" with them, and this time especially they haven`t a leg to stand on.

    Alternatively there will shortly be politicians calling to your door. You could impress on them your feelings, but have aspirin handy if they represent any of the two parties that brought the money pit to life.
    Heart attacks could easily be brought on by just the mention of, as the wily Michael Noonan called it, the dead cat on the pitch.


  • Options
    #1443
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    charlie14 wrote: »
    Much of what has been going on in this thread of late is more light entertainment than anything to do with the title.

    So back to the subject.
    Anyone who is genuinely worried about having to pay for use over their allocation, my advice for what it is worth is if IW contact you, just ignore them.
    That was what killed their metering planes. People refused to "engage" with them, and this time especially they haven`t a leg to stand on.

    Alternatively there will shortly be politicians calling to your door. You could impress on them your feelings, but have aspirin handy if they represent any of the two parties that brought the money pit to life.
    Heart attacks could easily be brought on by just the mention of, as the wily Michael Noonan called it, the dead cat on the pitch.

    When you peel away the rubbish of the last several pages, this is the most sensible response here.
    The regime is dead only the party faithful are in denial.


  • Options
    #1444
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Whatever ones views on the rights and wrongs of Irish Water, we must all accept that they’re here to stay and are quietly getting on with the huge task of upgrading the infrastructure. They are hampered by the lack of funds. If people are wasteful, deliberately or innocently, they have to be prepared to accept the consequences. Talking about a certain percentage not metered and not detectable is just rubbish. Any good plumber could tell you in a few minutes if there’s a possibility of a leak. Failure to rectify said leak will only lead to homeowner having to pay.
    Night, night.


  • Options
    #1445
    K.Flyer
    Registered Users Posts: 8,565 ✭✭✭K.Flyer


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Any good plumber could tell you in a few minutes if there’s a possibility of a leak. Failure to rectify said leak will only lead to homeowner having to pay.
    Night, night.

    A leak does not automatically mean you are going over the threshold. A leak is just a leak and on a non-metered supply it means SFA other than its a leak.
    At the same time, an unmetered household may use way in excess of the threshold and can go totally unnoticed, especially if their consumption is during the day.
    Most people, in my experience, when informed that they have a leak, will pay attention to it. Not because they have a fear of I.W., more out of a sense of conserving water and not wanting to see it wasted.
    But if someone is informed that they have a leak on an unmetered supply, how will I.W. "make them pay" when they cannot ascertain the volume, answer, they can't.
    If its on a metered supply and they are not going above this notional threshold, how can they "make them pay" answer again, they can't.


  • Options
    #1446
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,302 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    charlie14 wrote: »
    Much of what has been going on in this thread of late is more light entertainment than anything to do with the title.

    So back to the subject.
    Anyone who is genuinely worried about having to pay for use over their allocation, my advice for what it is worth is if IW contact you, just ignore them.
    That was what killed their metering planes. People refused to "engage" with them, and this time especially they haven`t a leg to stand on.

    Alternatively there will shortly be politicians calling to your door. You could impress on them your feelings, but have aspirin handy if they represent any of the two parties that brought the money pit to life.
    Heart attacks could easily be brought on by just the mention of, as the wily Michael Noonan called it, the dead cat on the pitch.

    So you are encouraging people to break the law and cheat the taxpayer? Can’t say I expected anything different.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1447
    charlie14
    Registered Users Posts: 14,915 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    blanch152 wrote: »
    So you are encouraging people to break the law and cheat the taxpayer? Can’t say I expected anything different.


    The taxpayer has already been cheated out of a Billion euro on a quango that has time after time proven it is nothing but a leech on the taxpayer.

    Yet you are on here campaigning to throw away as much as twice that amount again for no other purpose than to just keep the leech alive to break even without any improvement in services.


    If there was a queue for cheating the taxpayer, your proposal would leave you miles out in front.


  • Options
    #1448
    charlie14
    Registered Users Posts: 14,915 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Whatever ones views on the rights and wrongs of Irish Water, we must all accept that they’re here to stay and are quietly getting on with the huge task of upgrading the infrastructure. They are hampered by the lack of funds. If people are wasteful, deliberately or innocently, they have to be prepared to accept the consequences. Talking about a certain percentage not metered and not detectable is just rubbish. Any good plumber could tell you in a few minutes if there’s a possibility of a leak. Failure to rectify said leak will only lead to homeowner having to pay.
    Night, night.


    Irish Water has shown itself to be unfit for purpose. From day one it has been nothing other than an added level of bureaucracy swallowing up taxpayers money that should be going to improve the infrastructure. A mini H.S.E.
    You have been asked time and time how unmetered households and apartments (that were never intended or even possible to meter ) were going to be detected for exceeding there allowance.
    So do us all a favour, unless you can answer that with a coherent response that makes practical and economic sense when we have 50% of treated water pissing out of mains leak, then give it a rest.

    Your party political speech has long passed its sell by date.


  • Options
    #1449
    McMurphy
    Registered Users Posts: 13,365 ✭✭✭✭McMurphy


    Something caught my eye earlier on my newsfeed, anyone shilling for the return of water charges really ought to be considering a shill career change.

    Not looking likely anytime soon. Time to move on and get over it.

    35% of people would pay water charges if they were brought in now


  • Options
    #1450
    charlie14
    Registered Users Posts: 14,915 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Johnny Dogs wrote: »
    Something caught my eye earlier on my newsfeed, anyone shilling for the return of water charges really ought to be considering a shill career change.

    Not looking likely anytime soon. Time to move on and get over it.

    35% of people would pay water charges if they were brought in now


    With only 24% of the 18-24s saying they would not pay, anytime soon is an understatement.
    With only 24% from that age group in particular, it doesn`t look as there is much belief in the conservation argument.


  • Options
    #1451
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    charlie14 wrote: »
    With only 24% of the 18-24s saying they would not pay, anytime soon is an understatement.
    With only 24% from that age group in particular, it doesn`t look as there is much belief in the conservation argument.

    So, they want to save the world, but let someone else pay?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1452
    Brendan Bendar
    Registered Users Posts: 19,160 ✭✭✭✭Brendan Bendar


    Deleted User wrote: »
    So, they want to save the world, but let someone else pay?

    Mary, you flicked the button good on that post. Tipped it over the edge.

    Got a sweet surge, you see that’s the deal, they want everything but someone else has to pay.

    Well said.


  • Options
    #1453
    charlie14
    Registered Users Posts: 14,915 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Deleted User wrote: »
    So, they want to save the world, but let someone else pay?


    Naw, they just know a con when they see one.


  • Options
    #1454
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    Brendan Bendar wrote: »
    Mary, you flicked the button good on that post. Tipped it over the edge.

    Got a sweet surge, you see that’s the deal, they want everything but someone else has to pay.

    Well said.

    Are 18 to 24 year olds exempt from taxes?


  • Options
    #1455
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    So, they want to save the world, but let someone else pay?

    They pay taxes. ;-)


  • Options
    #1456
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Plumbthedepths wrote: »
    They pay taxes. ;-)

    Maybe. But don’t want to pay for a utility. ie water.


  • Options
    #1457
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Maybe. But don’t want to pay for a utility. ie water.

    Water is already paid for from our taxes.


  • Options
    #1458
    Plumbthedepths
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,653 ✭✭✭✭Plumbthedepths


    [Deleted User] wrote: »
    Maybe. But don’t want to pay for a utility twice. ie water.
    FYP. ;-)


  • Options
    #1459
    charlie14
    Registered Users Posts: 14,915 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Deleted User wrote: »
    Maybe. But don’t want to pay for a utility. ie water.


    Why would they. Their taxes are paying for water.

    As I told you already they know a con when they see one.


  • Options
    #1460
    aido79
    Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 5,374 Mod ✭✭✭✭aido79


    charlie14 wrote: »
    Their taxes are paying for water.

    This method obviously isn't working. Why do other countries not have the same problem with water supply that Ireland has?


  • Options
    #1461
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    aido79 wrote: »
    This method obviously isn't working. Why do other countries not have the same problem with water supply that Ireland has?

    Here in Ireland, we were told that our water was paid for from Vat and motor tax. Then Irish Water came along and said pay up. The people of Ireland told them to go and sh1te because we already pay.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1462
    aido79
    Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 5,374 Mod ✭✭✭✭aido79


    pablo128 wrote: »
    Here in Ireland, we were told that our water was paid for from Vat and motor tax. Then Irish Water came along and said pay up. The people of Ireland told them to go and sh1te because we already pay.

    The system of paying for water from Vat and motor tax has never worked and never contributed enough towards the upkeep of the water treatment and provision so how can you say you already paid before Irish water?


  • Options
    #1463
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    pablo128 wrote: »
    Here in Ireland, we were told that our water was paid for from Vat and motor tax. Then Irish Water came along and said pay up. The people of Ireland told them to go and sh1te because we already pay.
    And then complain about boil notices!!!


  • Options
    #1464
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    aido79 wrote: »
    The system of paying for water from Vat and motor tax has never worked and never contributed enough towards the upkeep of the water treatment and provision so how can you say you already paid before Irish water?

    Don't look at me. I'm just a tax paying worker. The government of the day are responsible for running the place. But when they try to charge people twice for the same thing, it's going to bring trouble.


  • Options
    #1465
    charlie14
    Registered Users Posts: 14,915 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    Deleted User wrote: »
    And then complain about boil notices!!!

    The first boil notice effecting 600,000 in the greater Dublin area had nothing to do with finance.
    It was simply Irish Water ineptitude pumping untreated water into the mains.
    The second, although the jury is still out, appears the same due to Irish Water not changing filters and allowing sediment enter the mains.


  • Options
    #1466
    charlie14
    Registered Users Posts: 14,915 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    aido79 wrote: »
    The system of paying for water from Vat and motor tax has never worked and never contributed enough towards the upkeep of the water treatment and provision so how can you say you already paid before Irish water?

    It wasn`t just fro V.A.T. and motor tax. It was from general taxation, which from July 2013 L/P.T. revenue was added.

    Short answer, especially when people saw a fortune of their tax money being squandered on an expensive quango they took the attitude we paid, you lot squandered it, and now you are doing it again and expect us to give you an open ended cheque to keep on doing it

    Or to paraphrase Brendan "We wont be stiffed twice"


  • Options
    #1467
    aido79
    Moderators, Regional Abroad Moderators Posts: 5,374 Mod ✭✭✭✭aido79


    charlie14 wrote: »
    It wasn`t just fro V.A.T. and motor tax. It was from general taxation, which from July 2013 L/P.T. revenue was added.

    Short answer, especially when people saw a fortune of their tax money being squandered on an expensive quango they took the attitude we paid, you lot squandered it, and now you are doing it again and expect us to give you an open ended cheque to keep on doing it

    Or to paraphrase Brendan "We wont be stiffed twice"

    What do you suggest they do to solve the problem?


  • Options
    #1468
    pablo128
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,221 ✭✭✭pablo128


    aido79 wrote: »
    What do you suggest they do to solve the problem?

    Why do you need the general public to suggest solutions? Isn't that what the 'consultants' are supposed to do? That's what they are paid handsomely for.


  • Options
    #1469
    blanch152
    Registered Users Posts: 27,302 ✭✭✭✭blanch152


    aido79 wrote: »
    This method obviously isn't working. Why do other countries not have the same problem with water supply that Ireland has?


    Because they have water charges.

    The current problems with the water supply in Dublin were entirely predictable in an Ireland without water charges. Some posters don’t want to hear that obviously.


  • Options
    #1470
    charlie14
    Registered Users Posts: 14,915 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    aido79 wrote: »
    What do you suggest they do to solve the problem?

    Do from what it is obvious from what the vast majority of people want from that link in Johnny Dogs link.

    Fund water services from how we have been taxed to fund it, through general taxation, but do not insult our intelligence on their being a problem with funding. During the worst economic crisis in our history 1 Billion has been wasted for nothing, while we have a health system that gets progressively worse while taxpayers money is thrown at it like confetti at a wedding.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #1471
    charlie14
    Registered Users Posts: 14,915 ✭✭✭✭charlie14


    blanch152 wrote: »
    Because they have water charges.

    The current problems with the water supply in Dublin were entirely predictable in an Ireland without water charges. Some posters don’t want to hear that obviously.


    Most, if not all, of the Dublin problem was caused by a quango set up to collect water charges by their own ineptitude in water treatment.


Advertisement