No refund for families who have paid water charges

tipptom · 03-03-2016 02:45PM

Terri26 wrote: »

People who didn't pay were taking a chance/risq themselves. I'll be annoyed if people do get refunded as they didn't take the risk.

Kind of a reverse of the Bondholders situation

Crocked · 03-03-2016 02:46PM

Arkady wrote: »

You've selectively edited and attempted to misquote the post. I'm afraid you can't successfully separate what actually happened (reality) from what you'd and all the lying political parties like to try and spin. Even the law abiding people that faithfully paid the water charges are wiser to you now. Is that you Phil ? General taxation was not reduced to take account of the water charges, nor is health and education in any better shape since Irish water, in fact it's worse.

I didn't selectively quote or attempt to misquote. I quoted the exact point that I was taking issue with. I didn't include the rest of your ramblings about the "the man" and them being out to get us.

You're making my argument for me. Taxation wasn't reduced, nor should it have been, to take account of water being billed directly so that that money could then be redirected to other areas in need of investment. Well until they came up with that silly grant payment. That a service hasn't miraculously improved in a short period of time doesn't mean that we should cut taxes to offset the water charges and then at the same time moan about lack of resources for key state services.

And back to my original post, unlike you claimed, we weren't paying for water twice. People who have their own wells or private systems whilst water services were being paid from general taxation can quite rightly say they were paying twice. But most of the moaners don't fall into this category

granturismo · 03-03-2016 03:03PM

mjp wrote: »

... and just off the phone to ulsterbank in getting it cancelled. Also to my surprise managed to get all payments since june last year reversed also and â‚¬260 will be back in my bank ac in 48 hours...

I'm also with UB. How did you manage to get €260 refunded? thanks.

arayess · 03-03-2016 03:25PM

mahoganygas wrote: »

I paid my bills in 2015. If FF or anyone else scraps charges then I want to see 1 of 3 things happening:

1. Non payers are pursued and forced to pay arrears in full for 2015.

2. People like me who paid in full will receive a refund.

3. When water charges come back in 5 years down the road that my previous payments are credited to my account. Those who didn't pay in 2015 will indirectly pay in 2020.

Anything less than this is an insult to law abiding citizens who pay their taxes every day.

What an utter mess.

good luck with that !!

never paid .

Although I had a thought , if I knew that water(and other resources) were protected constitutionally against privatization . then I might consider paying for water - depends on other levels of taxation though

Permabear · 03-03-2016 03:30PM

This post has been deleted.

oscarBravo · 03-03-2016 03:35PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It doesn't. It's part of the mile-high stack of nonsense that's been talked about in relation to Irish Water - stuffing rubbish into the constitution about preventing privatisation.

granturismo · 03-03-2016 04:15PM

Terri26 wrote: »

People who didn't pay were taking a chance/risq themselves. I'll be annoyed if people do get refunded as they didn't take the risk.

Schadenfreude at its best.

mahoganygas · 03-03-2016 04:21PM

Terri26 wrote: »

People who didn't pay were taking a chance/risq themselves. I'll be annoyed if people do get refunded as they didn't take the risk.

Are you a building developer by any chance?

Or perhaps one of those "banksters" I've been hearing all about?

tipptom · 03-03-2016 04:47PM

The people have won,let the whingers head for Castlebar

arayess · 03-03-2016 04:58PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

It doesn't.

oscarBravo wrote: »

It doesn't. It's part of the mile-high stack of nonsense that's been talked about in relation to Irish Water - stuffing rubbish into the constitution about preventing privatisation.

of course.
god forbid somebody has an idea outside of what you think is acceptable.:rolleyes:

ideally i wouldn't put it in the constitution but we don't have any provision for laws and such that must be agreed by a plebiscite before its status can be changed outside the constitution.
If that structure was in place then fire away.
It's not rubbish...the only thing that is rubbish is your sh1ting on your people's valid ideas/concerns.

but sorry for upseting you with notions ...:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Did it ever occur to you that people don't want privatization of their water and would seek to protect this? no....you didn't ok so....

Clampdown · 03-03-2016 05:00PM

Irish water was a quango, set up through cronyism simply to extract money from citizens. It was never ever about water conservation, which was made obvious by the capped charge, and by their inability to meter apartment blocks. It was a symbol of the arrogance, dishonesty and corruption that is rife within Irish politics and big business, and how they view ordinary people as nothing more than peasants who they have no problem plucking their last pennies from.

If you bent over and paid it, with the typical Irish 'what can we do?' attitude, even when the anti-side had made huge strides in achieving concessions from the gov and IW, and even after the road tax and local property tax was redirected to IW, and even after reading the constant stories of corruption, lies, and incompetence that were all over the news ALL THE TIME about IW, then I have no sympathy for you whatsoever.

Maybe stand up for yourself next time. If you want to pay for a better water system, fine. If you dislike the fact that your taxes subsidize non-workers water, fine. But don't let yourself be fleeced by a disgustingly inept and corrupt company.

Anyway I suspect as soon as FF think they have a majority (next election, probably), they'll try and bring back the charge, knowing that FG can't campaign on a platform of No Water Charges. They said they'd bring it back in 5 years earlier during this election campaign. So don't worry sheep, you'll get another chance to get fleeced, to be sure.

Mr.Micro · 03-03-2016 05:20PM

All this thing about water charges and the country in a mess. All those who voted for FF thinking the charges were going to be lifted, are in for a wait IMO. FF will be only too happy for the charges to stay in place, thus keeping the petty anger going against FG. Why stop at water charges. There is the unfair council tax, tv licence, car tax for terrible roads, why pay them either? So petty.

MayoAreMagic · 03-03-2016 05:36PM

Clampdown wrote: »

Irish water was a quango, set up through cronyism simply to extract money from citizens. It was never ever about water conservation

In fairness, if they wanted to get more money, they could have done it a whole lot easier than this.

May I ask you, and anyone else, how much a month do you spend on bottled water? Wouldn't it be a better idea to upgrade our system and have that quality of water in our taps for a fraction of the price? 160 euro - yet we pay 2.50 for a 300ml bottle in a bar. We are off our heads.

If there was ever a case of cutting off our nose to spite our face this is it.

As for the people who allowed meters to be fitted, I suggest charging them at a lower tariff than those without.

gladrags · 03-03-2016 06:36PM

oscarBravo wrote: »

It doesn't. It's part of the mile-high stack of nonsense that's been talked about in relation to Irish Water - stuffing rubbish into the constitution about preventing privatisation.

To be fair,he never said it was in the constitution.

"if I knew that water(and other resources) were protected constitutionally against privatization"

You should know better.

Permabear · 03-03-2016 06:52PM

This post has been deleted.

dollyk · 03-03-2016 07:03PM

Are some saying that we can get direct debits refunded by our bank.
Im with aib maybe I will ring tomorrow, cancel the d/d and ask about a refund >
Thanks.

MANDATORY FIELD
Signature:
Customer signature is key to
the successful operation of
the scheme. Where a signed
mandate form is not held by
the creditor then transactions
could be deemed as
unauthorised and the debtor
may be entitled to request
refund of all transactions for
the previous 13 months.

Arkady · 03-03-2016 08:53PM

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Of that list, lets have a look at who was actually involved in conceiving, setting up, running and managing the fiasco that is Irish Water.

> Inept politicians - check,
> Interfering unions - nope. I'm not fan of unions but they were against the setting up of Irish Water and had nothing to do with its planning and management. They were specifically excluded from it's setting up.
> radicalized left-wing protesters - again, not a fan, but they had nothing to do with the setting up and management of Irish water
> and freeloading customers , again, not a fan, but they had nothing to do with the conception, planning and execution of Irish Water.
> Conspicuous by their absence from your list > The management of Irish Water
> Overstaffing ? - Again nothing to do with the staff, but with the management. Existing local authority staff were more than capable of doing the job, but had been starved of funding and decent management for years. Instead they were landed with a load of inexperienced greedy and arrogant jobs for the boys cronies and spin doctors, who never managed water resources and infrastructure in their lives.

I'm not left wing, but to conclude that the fiasco that was Irish water was not due to arrogance, mismanagement and ill planning, but instead some powerful left wing conspiracy, is not addressing or acknowledging the cause of the failure. Failure to accept and learn that expensive lesson, means this utter organisational failure is doomed to be repeated.

oscarBravo · 03-03-2016 08:56PM

arayess wrote: »

of course.
god forbid somebody has an idea outside of what you think is acceptable.:rolleyes:

You can have and express any idea you want, but you don't have an exemption from having your ideas criticised.

ideally i wouldn't put it in the constitution but we don't have any provision for laws and such that must be agreed by a plebiscite before its status can be changed outside the constitution.
If that structure was in place then fire away.

The constitution isn't - or shouldn't be - a dumping ground for laws that the current population doesn't want future generations to be able to easily change. If you don't want the provision of water privatised, don't vote for a government that will privatise the provision of water. If a future electorate wants to allow privatisation, it can vote for a different government.

Did it ever occur to you that people don't want privatization of their water and would seek to protect this? no....you didn't ok so....

People can want what they like. It doesn't make cluttering the constitution a good idea. I'm terribly sorry for having the temerity to disagree with you, though.

gladrags wrote: »

To be fair,he never said it was in the constitution.

"if I knew that water(and other resources) were protected constitutionally against privatization"

You should know better.

I didn't say he said it was in the constitution.

oscarBravo · 03-03-2016 08:58PM

dollyk wrote: »

Are some saying that we can get direct debits refunded by our bank.

You might. But, as I've said already, getting a refund from the bank doesn't change the fact of whether or not you owe the money.

I pay my business taxes through SEPA. In theory, I could get a refund of my taxes from the bank - but that won't magically mean I don't owe those taxes.

jimmycrackcorm · 03-03-2016 10:20PM

micosoft wrote:

Effectively FF are proposing to legalise tax evasion on the principle that any tax could at any point in the future be cancelled without recourse for those who have paid said charge and no penalties for those who have not. Why would you pay anything on that basis!

But it's not tax evasion because it's a service charge. If it had been introduced as a proper tax like USC or property tax then we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

But then who knew a charge based on the sensibility of consumer / polluter pays principle would actually turn out to be a catch all for austerity.

xz · 03-03-2016 10:47PM

I haven't paid my water charges, but, I'm not averse to paying for a proper water infrastructure. What I am averse to, is being bullied into a contract with a company that was a sham from the get go, hence I decided not to pay.

esforum · 03-03-2016 10:52PM

vicwatson wrote: »

EU fines, we might not even be in, and there might not even be, an EU in 12 months time

rubbish, absolute rubbish. The EU will not vanish in 12 months and if Ireland didnt walk away in 2007 and 2008 we certainly wont now

esforum · 03-03-2016 10:53PM

xz wrote: »

I haven't paid my water charges, but, I'm not averse to paying for a proper water infrastructure. What I am averse to, is being bullied into a contract with a company that was a sham from the get go, hence I decided not to pay.

Before privatisation did you have electricity?

xz · 03-03-2016 10:58PM

esforum wrote:

Before privatisation did you have electricity?

I wasn't bullied into paying for that service, nor gas, or telephone etc, etc, I am not against paying for a proper water infrastructure, but not in the way that IW was set up and forced upon us, the idea was good, but the implementation was a complete farce

Birdie Num Num · 03-03-2016 11:55PM

xz wrote: »

I wasn't bullied into paying for that service, nor gas, or telephone etc, etc, I am not against paying for a proper water infrastructure, but not in the way that IW was set up and forced upon us, the idea was good, but the implementation was a complete farce

?

gctest50 · 04-03-2016 12:07AM

xz wrote: »

I wasn't bullied into paying for that service, nor gas, or telephone etc, etc, I am not against paying for a proper water infrastructure, but not in the way that IW was set up and forced upon us, the idea was good, but the implementation was a complete farce

Starting from before IW was set up :

How would you implement it ? ( just a quick step by step thing)

1. ?

Charles Babbage · 04-03-2016 12:59AM

xz wrote: »

I wasn't bullied into paying for that service, nor gas, or telephone etc, etc, I am not against paying for a proper water infrastructure, but not in the way that IW was set up and forced upon us, the idea was good, but the implementation was a complete farce

You weren't bullied into paying for water either, you can just stop using it.

Arkady · 04-03-2016 02:40AM

Charles Babbage wrote: »

You weren't bullied into paying for water either, you can just stop using it.

You'd think water was a basic requirement to sustain human life they way the whingers talk (as dear leader calls them). Mr Ahern was also right, they should just kill themselves and let us get on with making money from the rest.

The peasants will even complain when our next company Irish Air wins the rights to install, supply and maintain breathing air meters and the billing system. They must think clean air just exists, and requires no real expenditure to supply and maintain.

topmanamillion · 04-03-2016 02:53AM

Arkady wrote: »

You'd think water was a basic requirement to sustain human life they way the whingers talk (as dear leader calls them). Mr Ahern was also right, they should just kill themselves and let us get on with making money from the rest.

The peasants will even complain when our next company Irish Air wins the rights to install, supply and maintain breathing air meters and the billing system. They must think clean air just exists, and requires no real expenditure to supply and maintain.

Ah good I've caught this thread at the hysterical stage

uck51js9zml2yt · 04-03-2016 02:58AM

Arkady wrote: »

You'd think water was a basic requirement to sustain human life they way the whingers talk (as dear leader calls them). Mr Ahern was also right, they should just kill themselves and let us get on with making money from the rest.

The peasants will even complain when our next company Irish Air wins the rights to install, supply and maintain breathing air meters and the billing system. They must think clean air just exists, and requires no real expenditure to supply and maintain.

Do you think this is Japan with your fancy oxygen?
http://wandertokyo.com/tokyo-oxygen-bars/

No refund for families who have paid water charges

Comments