obezyana wrote: » How? I wont bother sending it back ill do a Keith Barry on it and make it disappear and sure they have to have evidence plus any Joe Soap could of robbed my lovely and cherished meter. They cannot convict if they do not have evidence to back it up.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » How are you sure you won't damage it by removing it?
geeksauce wrote: » They will prosecute you the exact same way the ESB do it, the defence of I didn't tamper with the meter doesn't work for ESB meters so wont work for IW meters.
obezyana wrote: » You do know they only twist off right? So close the shut off valve twist off the meter turn back on the valve and job done. How did you actually think they were going turn people off if they didnt pay?
geeksauce wrote: » I don't think they will be able to stop water to a specific apartment, they would instead prosecute the person living in the apartment that is not paying.
obezyana wrote: » But how can they convict if there is no evidence? your not proving to me that the courts can convict a person even with no evidence.
Daith wrote: » The Occupant? If someone doesn't return their form who are they going to prosecute?
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » I'm not a plumber and haven't looked into how to illegally remove a water meter so no i didn't know that.
geeksauce wrote: » The landlord/owner of the property, who I am sure will be only too happy to pass on the details of the occupants of the premises.
They cannot convict if they do not have evidence to back it up.
geeksauce wrote: » I posted a link a couple of weeks ago on this very thread showing a court convicted an idiot for tampering with his meter, this idiot used the defence that the ESB couldn't prove he tampered with the meter and he was convicted of tampering with his meter.
obezyana wrote: » There must of been some proof that it was him that tampered with it. Surely the court cannot convict a person of something if it cannot be proved.
seamus wrote: » They can take a civil case which works on the balance of probabilities, not proof beyond reasonable doubt. If your meter is "missing", your neighbours meters aren't and you've been online talking about removing your meter, then a judge will see it most likely that you've removed the meter and rule against you accordingly. If you remove the meter and post it back to them, you can be done for illegal tampering. Like gas or electricity, it is not legal for an unauthorised person to perform any work on a public water main. Authorisation for this work can only be provided by Irish Water. That one's an actual criminal matter, so you'd need to make sure nobody sees you messing with it.
geeksauce wrote: » That to me reads like something a child would say in the midst of a tantrum. You can ask to be disconnected from the public water supply and then you wont need to pay them a penny, imagine that a simple solution to a simple problem. Don't want to pay for a service, then don't use the service who'd have thought something so simple could solve all your worries.
obezyana wrote: » Yes the bold i understand so i guess ill have to take the neighbours ones aswell Its going to be a busy night.
Daith wrote: » Yes but the occupant hasn't signed a contract. How can IW prove they were using water? This is just more hypothetical wondering tbh.
geeksauce wrote: » Dont need to prove that they were using water as their bill is not based on water usage.
seamus wrote: » The onus would be on the occupant to show that they've turned off all water-using things (including anything in the heating system) and don't use their toilets or drains.
Recondite49 wrote: » Indeed, and little things like thirst and adequate sanitation are no doubt mere details in your smug world view ; are you really trying to be clever? Legally speaking we can't be disconnected; so I'm more than happy to have a meter installed, they won't have my name or my money so they can knock themselves out. Water is a basic right and the money for this should come from tax rather than as a blanket charge ; if enough people refuse to pay by way of civil disobedience then we may be able to get the Goverment to change its policy. Political dissent is not childishness ; in my experience it's only the right wing nuts who try to claim that, no doubt you're different...
Recondite49 wrote: » Indeed, and little things like thirst and adequate sanitation are no doubt mere details in your smug world view ; are you really trying to be clever?Legally speaking we can't be disconnected; so I'm more than happy to have a meter installed, they won't have my name or my money so they can knock themselves out. Water is a basic right and the money for this should come from tax rather than as a blanket charge ; if enough people refuse to pay by way of civil disobedience then we may be able to get the Goverment to change its policy. Political dissent is not childishness ; in my experience it's only the right wing nuts who try to claim that, no doubt you're different...
Daith wrote: » Their bill is based on them being a customer. They haven't signed anything to say they are? As you said it would be up to the landlord for tenants but if there is no landlord?
Banjo String wrote: » A judge would be granted access to a defendants internet activities, based on a missing meter from Irish Water. What is this sorcery
obezyana wrote: » This for me is the answer. A massive sustained protest and refusal to pay might of just stopped this crap from ever happening. I dont belive the small pockets of resistance to the water meters os going to have an impact. So let them install them all everybody has to do is refuse to pay..........or if they need some one to remove them then im your man
geeksauce wrote: » Like the mass protests that got rid of the lpt and hhc. Oh wait!!
VinLieger wrote: » As far as im concerned as my taxes are still the same im still paying for my water through the council
VinLieger wrote: » and until they are reduced accordingly I wont be paying Irish water a 2nd time for it.
