VinLieger wrote: » I like my anonymity thank's but as far as I know there is actually nothing of consequence that it can be used for beyond getting your name, if you know otherwise prove me wrong
hju6 wrote: » So according to you, it's the people's fault for voting in the incompetant politicians, and then when the people stand up and protest against the incompetant politicians it's the people's fault. So basically, according to you, everything is the people's fault .:eek:
Tony EH wrote: » You see, this is how rip off Ireland exists. It's 20c this week. In a few months it'll be a euro...some time after that a euro fifty...until one day people are on Boards wondering why a pint of tap water cost them 3 euro. The :rolleyes:
Little CuChulainn wrote: » For people who register for a pps with false details or multiple identities.
hju6 wrote: » Personal Public Service Number FraudPPS number misuse is one of the most dangerous types of identity theft. A thief may use your NI number fraudulently to obtain Social Security benefits, welfare benefits, tax refunds, or credit. In other cases, a thief might use your NI number to obtain employment in your name. An identity thief's use of your PPS number can cause you to lose the legitimate benefits to which you are entitled.http://www.aigdirect.ie/FAQs-Identify-Theft-Insurance_1189_269657.html
Tony EH wrote: » FFS, did you even understand the point.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » If they are paying for water (which they are), why should they be castigated for charging someone for some of it? Why shouldn't beer be free but water should ?both cost money to the pub. People are free to not go there.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » If a pub wants to charge 3e for a pint of tap water thats their choice, just like they're free to charge €7.50 for a pint of beer. Lots of moaning about nothing.
Tony EH wrote: » Spectacularly missing the point.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » The discussion is irrelevant to the thread. It is a private company charging for a product and service that they didn't before.
mikom wrote: » A private company................... like a privatized company can......... go about charging exorbitant rates
Guy:Incognito wrote: » Not if there's a body that has to approve their prices. We could call them something like the commision for energy regulation.
Guy:Incognito wrote: » The discussion is irrelevant to the thread. It is a private company charging for a product and service that they didn't before. It has no relevance to Iw or the introduction of residential water charges. Trying to tack it on as part of the case against water charges is disingenuous.
shinzon wrote: » this is what water charges gets ye folks but continue away defending the indefensible.
shinzon wrote: » Epically missing the point,
shinzon wrote: » Epically missing the point, do you think that pub owner came in of a Monday morning and said you know better start charging for water here, no he didn't it wouldnt even have been contemplated if it wasn't for the charges. Jumping on the bandwagon and you can bet he or she wont be the only one, tip of the iceberg tbh, this is what water charges gets ye folks but continue away defending the indefensible. Shin
shinzon wrote: » it wouldnt even have been contemplated if it wasn't for the charges.
Shin
Phoebas wrote: » This is such a bogus story - it's about some civil servants in the DSP posting some stuff up on an internal notice board. It's not about officials expressing concerns in their official capacity. .
By Joe Leogue and Juno McEnroe Irish Water has finally started a hunt for a data protection manager, months after it started the process of demanding and recording customers’ PPS numbers. Independent TD Catherine Murphy described seeking a data protection manager at this point as “a cart before the horse situation that is typical of Irish Water”. “It looks like this has not been thought out at all. We saw an example last week of people’s bank details being sent to their landlords, which undermines confidence in Irish Water. This is not a minor issue,” the Kildare North TD warned. The advertisement for the position, posted online yesterday, comes as ministers defended the right of Irish Water to seek people’s PPS numbers, following reports that staff in one Government department had expressed concerns about handing over details.
Barely There wrote: » :rolleyes: Too funny.
So who's to blame for the 20c price for a commercial glass of tapwater? IW/Gov for introducing domestic charges, or the pub management for possibly attempting to take advantage of some people not knowing the difference between commercial and domestic supplies? It could all just be a coincidence in timing as well and they just wanted to deter people from not purchasing high value products
Bojack
gladrags wrote: » Because of RISK of fraud,it is not in any individuals interest to have their PPS #,distributed to third parties. Particularly if that risk is high,which in the case of IW,has been proven so.
papu wrote: » Wheres the proof?
Guy:Incognito wrote: » Did someone from social protection not leave a laptop full of peoples data in a taxi a year or two back, or somthing similar?
TheChizler wrote: » So what actually is the issue or fear with giving out PPS numbers? Is the worry that IW are going to use it to commit fraud? That they'll sell it to another company to commit fraud? That they'll lose a database somewhere or it will be compromised somehow and whoever finds it will use it to commit fraud (the only real, but unlikely, possibility IMO)? What are the types of fraud that specific possession of PPSNs opens up? People claiming welfare on your behalf? Registering with the PRTB in your name? Obtain employment in your name? Pay tax in your name? Attempt to set up a bank account in your name? These are all possibilities I suppose, but how likely? And what's the likelihood of success for the fraudster? I imagine if any of them happened it would be a pain in the butt, but ultimately resolvable with a small bit of effort once discovered. Is the chance of any of these happening worthy of the effort it would take to run with the alternative (welfare dealing with allowances directly)? People trust their PPSN all the time to organisations with fractions of the resources and scrutiny that IW will be subjected to, employers, employers' contracted accountants, hospital insurance departments (quite often faxed (:eek:), without cover letters or emailed without encryption), the postal system, landlords, the PRTB, bus companies for travel passes, educational institutions (primary, secondary, and tertiary), driving test and licencing centers (nobody kicks up a fuss when the NDLS ask for PPSNs, though they're run by SGS Ireland, a private company), pharmacies when you use the drugs payment card, etc. It would be nice if IW explained in clear terms why exactly they need the PPSN, but I think it's intended for identity verification and duplication prevention purposes when claiming allowances. Overall I think they shouldn't be asking for them, but only because the free allowance scheme I think is redundant. It would be fine if the allowance was paid by Welfare, and correct me if I'm wrong but I'm fairly sure this is fully internal to IW, i.e. you buy your meal but get the ketchup free, however the ketchup is actually factored into the cost of the meal. It might encourage higher users to use less so they will be subsidizing lower users less, but overall I think it's just in there so you feel you're getting better value.
Fuhrer wrote: » Probably more to do with identity fraud. You wouldn't find out about it until you fail a credit check and find out someone using your identity has racked up thousands in debt and you're now liable for it.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/142ca01176d77f407c7f9cf3f95ac61c.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e1dabb4a294ff0e3daca061094070dd3.svg)
