Water charges for excessive usage

is_that_so · 18-07-2019 9:07am

odyssey06 wrote: »

And also, surely a leak would account for a helluva lot more water than > 1.8 times the household average?

It needs to be both and IW have acknowledged that work has to be done on leaks.

The Bishop Basher · 18-07-2019 9:09am

is_that_so wrote: »

For people to waste water?

The vast majority of people don't waste water.

Leaks are a far greater issue and while meters may help with finding them, charging people won't make them go away.

Boggles · 18-07-2019 9:12am

I assume they have a new spin team.

I miss this lady, the original Kellyanne Conway.

Fúck me, could she belt out an alternative fact.

is_that_so · 18-07-2019 9:17am

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

The vast majority of people don't waste water.

Leaks are a far greater issue and while meters may help with finding them, charging people won't make them go away.

It could be leaks, it may not. And the article I linked to mentions that issue as well. This approval will allow them to charge if required.

The Bishop Basher · 18-07-2019 9:22am

is_that_so wrote: »

It could be leaks, it may not. And the article I linked to mentions that issue as well. This approval will allow them to charge if required.

I don't trust this government and so they don't have my approval.

As has already been pointed out.. none of the original issues have been addressed.

And a referendum on the ownership of IW is just another red herring.

We're never going to let them sell it off anyway. We don't need a vote to know that.

People need to remember where the real power lies.

If the water protest showed us anything it was that people have to power to say no.

Berserker · 18-07-2019 9:35am

Inevitable that this was going to happen after the increase in the green vote in the last election. Water charges were always going to be top of their list.

kippy wrote: »

I think a few things need to be nailed down:
1. Irish Water (or the provision of water within Ireland) should never be privatised.
2. The bodies that deliver this service to the state should be run as efficiently as is possible.

Why should IW not be privatized? Hard to see IW being run efficiently if it is not privatized.

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

So I got onto my local SF counselor and had the installations stopped.

How did the councillor get the installation stopped?

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

Unless they can specifically measure your household usage, there’s no way they’ll be able to bill you for it. That’s their problem though.

Place a flat charge on every home that did not support the installation of a water meter. Preventing the installation of that meter was not a legal action.

JohnnyFlash · 18-07-2019 9:37am

Great news. A charge for consumption of this precious commodity is much needed. Irish Water is no different than the ESB or Gas Networks Ireland. A charge will ensure that monies are raised to allow for continued investment in our water infrastructure, and that it doesn’t become the first thing to be cut from the general taxation wish list as it's ‘out of sight, and out of mind’ infrastructure.

Plumbthedepths · 18-07-2019 9:44am

Berserker wrote:

Place a flat charge on every home that did not support the installation of a water meter. Preventing the installation of that meter was not a legal action.

What about those that cannot be metered for various reasons and those that did not oppose a meter but simply hadn't one installed? Can you link to the legislation where it said it was illegal to oppose the installation of a meter?

odyssey06 · 18-07-2019 9:44am

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

Great news. A charge for consumption of this precious commodity is much needed. Irish Water is no different than the ESB or Gas Networks Ireland. A charge will ensure that monies are raised to allow for continued investment in our water infrastructure, and that it doesn’t become the first thing to be cut from the general taxation wish list as it's ‘out of sight, and out of mind’ infrastructure.

That's not what this is. Or is it? Do elaborate.

Are we all about to get a free allowance of electricity or gas based on average household use?

The Bishop Basher · 18-07-2019 9:45am

Berserker wrote: »

How did the councillor get the installation stopped?

You'd have to ask the councilor but the work stopped within 20 mins and rightly so. Installing 1 meter at the top of the road could ascertain if there was a leak in the area and work from there. Putting multiple meters across multiple houses was a complete waste of money by anyone's standards. Those meters could never be used for billing.

Berserker wrote: »

Place a flat charge on every home that did not support the installation of a water meter. Preventing the installation of that meter was not a legal action.

I didn't pay and I won''t be paying this time.

Did you claim your refund ?

And peaceful protest is perfectly legal.

If you think otherwise you are free to call the gardai :rolleyes:

K.Flyer · 18-07-2019 9:45am

The main cause of leaks and water loss is in the infrastructure under the roads, before it gets to peoples houses. Like many years ago with re-laying the gas pipework infrastructure, they need to re-pipe vast amounts of old mains pipework under the streets. That's where the excessive usage / loss is. Excessive usage via domestic properties is miniscule compared to mains leaks and this new idea is just a ruse to start charging on the existing meters.
But what about the thousands of houses and thousands of apartments with no meters?
They will be left out of all of this because there is no way that they can calculate with any degree of accuracy the consumption in an individual property without a meter, especially if the entire block or road have no meters..
Attempting to impose charges on half the country because they have meters and then make up figures for the rest is unacceptable and should not be tolerated.
As has been said above already, this government seem to move from one financial disaster to the next.
People still consider Irish Water a fiasco and it is still fresh in their minds the utter waste of financial resources and gobsh!tery surrounding it.

Boggles · 18-07-2019 9:51am

The memories are flooding back.

Remember this bumbling idiot.

200k a year plus bonuses.

Got a €570,000 retirement package after 3 years of absolute and utter incompetence.

Necks like a Jockeys bollíx lecturing people about wastage!

ELM327 · 18-07-2019 9:51am

I was opposed to Irish Water last time and I am opposed to this now.

I do however believe we should all pay for water, not the stuff that falls from the skies but the service of purifying it and delivering it to your tap.

The reason I was against it was twofold:

1- Everyone should pay for water, no exemptions for the neaveaux riche on the dole getting hap
2- It should be privatized, government quangos don't work well in Ireland.

Have "Irish Water" in charge of the distribution network, and allow a number of water supply companies to resell water on to end users. Like other utilities (gas, electricity etc).

klaaaz · 18-07-2019 10:05am

Have they stopped giving 66% of the motor tax to IW? (along with the LPT and the VAT portion which was hiked years ago). Stop that carry on along with fixing the leaks first and crack down on the perks within IW and then water charges might be acceptable. Oh, am wondering how's the progress in the Siteserv inquiry?(another IW scandal which FG has kicked down the road)

Boggles · 18-07-2019 10:10am

ELM327 wrote: »

2- It should be privatized

No it shouldn't and for several reasons.

The main one being they are trying to mimic the English setup. Which has been without doubt an absolute failure and in all likely hood will have to be dismantled and brought back under public ownership.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/09/even-the-tories-should-admit-that-its-time-to-renationalise-the-water-companies/

They promised to bring efficiency. Instead they have brought unsustainable levels of debt that, one way or another, the public will have to redeem. Researchers at Greenwich University say that in the past decade, the nine companies have made £18.8 billion of post-tax profits. Far from using the money to make the water system better, they have paid out £18.1 billion in dividends, and financed investment through loading £42 billion of debt on to consumers.

The university estimates the English are paying £2.3 billion more a year in water and sewerage bills than if the utility companies had remained in state ownership. These costs might have been bearable in good times, but as the Brexit-induced fall in the pound pushes real wages back down again, the prices of water, gas and electricity are bound to be political issues. Customers may not be overly keen to subsidise shareholders and lavishly overpaid managers.

Can you imagine where we would be in 20 years time given our regulation and penchant to pay way over the odds for everything.

Berserker · 18-07-2019 10:17am

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

What about those that cannot be metered for various reasons and those that did not oppose a meter but simply hadn't one installed? Can you link to the legislation where it said it was illegal to oppose the installation of a meter?

The Water Services Act 2007 will answer your last question. Meters can be installed for those who didn't have one installed. Someone will need to come up with a solution for those who cannot be metred. I'd charge them a fixed amount every month.

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

I didn't pay and I won''t be paying this time. Did you claim your refund ?

Never got round to claiming my refund now that you mention it.

cameramonkey · 18-07-2019 10:20am

Tommy Kelly wrote: »

No. It's our fault that water is being lost on public mains pipes. Decades upon decades of ignoring & not updating the water system has led to leaks on dirty, rotten & dangerous to our health, lead pipes.

Irish water have been for the past several years now upgrading these pipes in various parts of the country.

It's also worth noting that thousands of jobs have been created as a result of the ongoing upgrades to our water system.

How should IW be sanctioned for this loss of water. Maybe a 500 euro fine for every 213,000 lost through leaks? If IW are not sanctioned for this wastage of water then they will just continue to let water flow away , there has to be some sort of fine, they have now had a few years to deal with the problem but dont seem to do much about it.

Cryptopagan · 18-07-2019 10:21am

Berserker wrote: »

The Water Services Act 2007 will answer your last question. Meters can be installed for those who didn't have one installed. Someone will need to come up with a solution for those who cannot be metred. I'd charge them a fixed amount every month.

If they try roll out meters to all the non-metered homes and/or charge non-metered homes regardless, they will just run-in to all the same problems they did the first time around: opposition to installing the meters, and mass nonpayment. They won’t make those mistakes again. They will start out trying to charge metered households deemed to be overusing, and try normalize the charge that way

Plumbthedepths · 18-07-2019 10:29am

Berserker wrote:

The Water Services Act 2007 will answer your last question. Meters can be installed for those who didn't have one installed. Someone will need to come up with a solution for those who cannot be metred. I'd charge them a fixed amount every month.

Why not link the section? Hardly fair or ethical to charge someone for something that cannot be quantified at present.

Boggles · 18-07-2019 10:32am

I see they commissioned a survey (insert cost here) asking people about their water use.

One of the reason givens for spending 100s of millions in metering was we get accurate data on use.

Why are they depending on some nonsensical abstract survey for their figures?

[Deleted User] · 18-07-2019 10:36am

The Bishop Basher wrote: »

Leaks are a far greater issue and while meters may help with finding them, charging people won't make them go away.

It would, if the fees charged were ringfenced and used solely for improvements on the water infrastructure. Would people have an issue if this was the case?

[Deleted User] · 18-07-2019 10:38am

Boggles wrote: »

I see they commissioned a survey (insert cost here) asking people about their water use.

One of the reason givens for spending 100s of millions in metering was we get accurate data on use.

Why are they depending on some nonsensical abstract survey for their figures?

Because 10's of thousands of people didn't have anything installed. You can't refuse to get a meter installed on your property then turn around and use that as a stick to beat the government with.

cameramonkey · 18-07-2019 10:41am

Deleted User wrote: »

Because 10's of thousands of people didn't have anything installed. You can't refuse to get a meter installed on your property then turn around and use that as a stick to beat the government with.

People living in apartments. dont have water meters, how can they be billed for excessive usage? The biggest wasters of water are IW, we need to fix the pipes or fine them for the waste. They need to be make an example of if we are to persuade people that this is not just another tax.

Boggles · 18-07-2019 10:43am

Deleted User wrote: »

Because 10's of thousands of people didn't have anything installed. You can't refuse to get a meter installed on your property then turn around and use that as a stick to beat the government with.

You don't need every house in the country metered to get accurate data, you don't even need the majority of them metered.

But I'll tell you where you won't get accurate data, some wishy washy phone survery of 1000 people.

But this might blow your mind, I'll tell you why they have indulged in such folly.

Far easier spin some nonsensical survey then it is basic maths.

Publish the fúcking figures on usage and compare them to the rest of the EU and stop píssing on peoples legs and telling them it's raining.

Cryptopagan · 18-07-2019 10:43am

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Because 10's of thousands of people didn't have anything installed. You can't refuse to get a meter installed on your property then turn around and use that as a stick to beat the government with.

There were whole estates they didn’t install meters because of local opposition. It doesn’t always come down to individual householders.

Spanish Eyes · 18-07-2019 10:46am

Maybe they will end up adding a water levy to utility bills. That's tongue in cheek but stranger things have happened.

If they decide to start charging for overuse with those who were law abiding and did not prevent the installation of meters, the shoe will be on the other foot. Those who pay for everything will not stand for a two tier system.

firemansam4 · 18-07-2019 10:47am

Unless they do like they did with the property tax and start taking the charges from people at source then this will fail just like when they tried bringing in water charges the first time.

People will just mass boycott any charges and the moment they try and jail anyone you will see everyone out on the streets protesting again.

I wasn't against the charges per see the first time, but the way they have gone about it has been just one big waste of tax payers money at this stage.

K.Flyer · 18-07-2019 10:50am

Berserker wrote: »

The Water Services Act 2007 will answer your last question. Meters can be installed for those who didn't have one installed. Someone will need to come up with a solution for those who cannot be metred. I'd charge them a fixed amount every month..

Here is my issue with this, every property using mains (I.W.) supply Can be metered. There is always somewhere that a meter can be installed.
It doesn't need to have the easiest of access for reading/ inspection as they are rarely looked at unless there is a problem picking up the signal.
I.W. made it clear years ago that they had no plans to meter any apartments. They still have no plans.
From my own experience working in hundreds of apartments each year, you cannot impose the same flat fee on each of them because the occupancy levels can greatly differ, from a single person, to families, to the apartments where people only use them occasionally.
How would this work then with their First Leak Fixed Free programme?
Currently under the I.W. rules if you have no meter they will Not repair the leak, and this has been in place for years. I know people who paid their bills from I.W., had no meter, and were refused a repair. I.W. are a joke.
For the record, I have never had an objection to metered billing as long as it was balanced, fair priced and applied to everyone.
I abhore water wastage and have rang I.W. numerous times to report water leaks on the roads and footpaths.

InTheShadows · 18-07-2019 10:54am

I guess FG's spin merchants thought leaving it a couple of years and bringing charging in through the back door might work. I can't get over the stupidity of them tbh. They are without a doubt the most useless government we have ever had in my 46 years of life.

Berserker · 18-07-2019 10:57am

InTheShadows wrote: »

I guess FG's spin merchants thought leaving it a couple of years and bringing charging in through the back door might work. I can't get over the stupidity of them tbh. They are without a doubt the most useless government we have ever had in my 46 years of life.

They didn't. The looked at the results of the last election, told the electorate that they "got the message" and are using that change in the voting pattern to implement these changes. They've been waiting for an opportunity to implement these charges and the green vote has given them that chance.

Water charges for excessive usage

Comments