Household Charge Mega-Thread [Part 2] *Poll Reset*

Le_Dieux

dvpower wrote: »

@Ghandee.


You would firmly be a tax evader if you were liable fir property tax and you didn't pay it, even if you are paid to a bank account outside the juristiction.

OMG, DV, You seem to be a man with all answers. Where are you getting that last assessment from?

Sorry Ghandee, didn't mean to butt in, but he seems to be executioner and the rest.

dvpower

Ghandee wrote: »

Here we go....



That's pretty much me covered so

You can withdraw the evader remark now.

That doesn't cover you at all. It refers to INCOME tax, not PROPERTY tax.

Ghandee

dvpower wrote: »

That doesn't cover you at all. It refers to INCOME tax, not PROPERTY tax.

I can live with the name property tax evader.
Especially when I'm not 10% convinced, never mind 100% convinced that the money is going to a 'property tax' to fund 'local services'

Every other country in Europe can in some shape or form, make some sort of connection with service received/standard of service received with the payments you make.

This charge will not have these services attached to them, no services will be improved etc. for those reasons, i see this charge add nothing more then a revenue raising exercise that will be funnelled out of the country to pay of bankers debts (hence why the govt refuse point blank to connect the money to services)

I'll play no part in that. Jail me, call me names, whatever.

I asked for zero from this govt/state that i haven't paid for. I've received zero handouts/freebies from them.

They aren't getting my money for zero return.

donalg1

Le_Dieux wrote: »

darkhorse wrote: »

The only thing I can deduce, L_D, is, that it belongs to donal. What other reason could there be for him coming back with the answer that he came back with.

You see, the reason I say this is, well, right up to our last residents association meeting, which was held four weeks ago, the council actually owned said land. I would probably not even know this, only that I am treasurer. But, anything could have happened in the past four weeks and as one of donal's colleagues would say, I did'nt get the memo.

I was treasurer of our RA up to recently too DH.

I also despair at the inept reply that donal replied. I have been driving around today thinking, and want to ask him another question: Donal, if you are certain the CC don't own the green areas, then please enlighten me on that conclusion? SOMEBODY owns it. The half of the estate I am in has been handed over, so it damn well does not belong to the developer, who has gone bust, and left a derelict site (note) with concrete foundations excavated, and fencing falling down, Heavens forbid if a repeat of what occured in Mullingar( I think) should happen again. Sorry, the last part of that sentence is a digression.

Donal, please enlighten me on Your conclusion, would/could you?

Where did I say I was certain they don't own it I believe I said I wasn't sure who does. Point is they won't be cutting your grass for you that's all I said so you need to get this idea out of your head and accept the fact the residents will be cutting the grass for the foreseeable future.

Ghandee

donalg1 wrote: »

Where did I say I was certain they don't own it I believe I said I wasn't sure who does. Point is they won't be cutting your grass for you that's all I said so you need to get this idea out of your head and accept the fact the residents will be cutting the grass for the foreseeable future.

Kinda defeats the purpose of a hhc that 'pays for local services' Donal?
You know, if you have to service your (councils) local area yourself.

donalg1

Ghandee wrote: »

donalg1 wrote: »

Where did I say I was certain they don't own it I believe I said I wasn't sure who does. Point is they won't be cutting your grass for you that's all I said so you need to get this idea out of your head and accept the fact the residents will be cutting the grass for the foreseeable future.

Kinda defeats the purpose of a hhc that 'pays for local services' Donal?
You know, if you have to service your (councils) local area yourself.

But its an area in a private estate so isn't the councils area and isn't a public area as such.

Seriously though why do so many people believe the council do or should cut the grass in private estates.

Ghandee

donalg1 wrote: »

But its an area in a private estate so isn't the councils area and isn't a public area as such.

I'd bet the council wouldn't be long claiming it if you attempted to build on it/digg it up etc without the relevant planning permission though.

Fwiw, Sap landscapers look after my estate. €100 a year :mad:

donalg1

Ghandee wrote: »

donalg1 wrote: »

But its an area in a private estate so isn't the councils area and isn't a public area as such.

I'd bet the council wouldn't be long claiming it if you attempted to build on it/digg it up etc without the relevant planning permission though.

Fwiw, Sap landscapers look after my estate. €100 a year :mad:

I doubt they would claim it they would likely tell the person they can't build anything there without planning permission.

dvpower

Ghandee wrote: »

I'd bet the council wouldn't be long claiming it if you attempted to build on it/digg it up etc without the relevant planning permission though.

They wouldn't claim they own it, but they would enforce the planning regs - just one of the services that your LA provides.

dvpower

Ghandee wrote: »

Fwiw, Sap landscapers look after my estate. €100 a year :mad:

That's the equivilent of the HHC just for landscaping.
What happens to residents who decide its unfair and decide that they're not paying?

ncdadam

dvpower wrote: »

3. The revenue will raise an assesment against you and pursue you like they would anyone else. They have a lot of experience in dealing with tax evaders.

Like they did with Mick Wallace?

dvpower

ncdadam wrote: »

Like they did with Mick Wallace?

Exactly. I think the settlement was €2.1m including almost € 1/2m in penalties.

ncdadam

dvpower wrote: »

Exactly. I think the settlement was €2.1m including almost € 1/2m in penalties.

Have they received that money?

Will they ever receive that money?

Hijpo

dvpower wrote: »

ncdadam wrote: »

Like they did with Mick Wallace?

Exactly. I think the settlement was €2.1m including almost € 1/2m in penalties.

how much did he owe?

Le_Dieux

donalg1 wrote: »

Where did I say I was certain they don't own it I believe I said I wasn't sure who does. Point is they won't be cutting your grass for you that's all I said so you need to get this idea out of your head and accept the fact the residents will be cutting the grass for the foreseeable future.

IIRC, You said they - CC - WON'T cut the green areas in an estate because it's not theirs to cut.

IF You are so certain it isn't theirs, then You must know whose it is!!!

View

Ghandee wrote: »

I can live with the name property tax evader.
Especially when I'm not 10% convinced, never mind 100% convinced that the money is going to a 'property tax' to fund 'local services'

Every other country in Europe can in some shape or form, make some sort of connection with service received/standard of service received with the payments you make.

Every other country in Europe funds local services through local taxes with property tax (of some form) being either the sole or main local tax being levied on a local resident. They do so at rates anywhere between 10-30 times the HHC rate you refuse to pay.

Ultimately, you get the services you are prepared to pay for - so don't whine about your local authority not providing you with services when you refuse to pay a fraction of a cost of the services your local authority does provide much less the full amount that you'd be paying if you lived elsewhere.

And, yes, your local authority do provide services - see their annual report - they may provide a poor level of services but that is a reflection of what people are prepared to pay for.

There is a reason that, let's say, your local roads (they being one of the major services your local authority spends monies on), are not up to scratch and it is very simply lack of monies to spend on them. But then again, as you aren't prepared to pay your HHC to maintain the current level of spending on those roads, let's not pretend you are willing to pay more tax to see increased spending on them...

Le_Dieux

donalg1 wrote: »

But its an area in a private estate so isn't the councils area and isn't a public area as such.

Seriously though why do so many people believe the council do or should cut the grass in private estates.

Forgive my ignorance, but since when is an estate private? Or define a 'private estate' & a 'non private estate'. Or put another way, what does 'taken in charge' entail?

dvpower

Hijpo wrote: »

how much did he owe?

1.2 I think.

ncdadam wrote: »

Have they received that money?

Will they ever receive that money?

Who knows. They'll do what they can to get it.

Le_Dieux

dvpower wrote: »

1.2 I think.


Who knows. They'll do what they can to get it.

Wish You were right there DV. However, one rule for the fcuking TD's and another for the common man as far as I can see.

tayto lover

Le_Dieux wrote: »

Wish You were right there DV. However, one rule for the fcuking TD's and another for the common man as far as I can see.

Yes they closed down a good business today over the Revenue being owed half a million and put 400 out of work while Mick the T.D. continues on in his job and he owing millions. They also employ the Speculators in NAMA at huge money and they responsible for ruining the country and don't start me on their Banking friends.

donalg1

Le_Dieux wrote: »

donalg1 wrote: »

But its an area in a private estate so isn't the councils area and isn't a public area as such.

Seriously though why do so many people believe the council do or should cut the grass in private estates.

Forgive my ignorance, but since when is an estate private? Or define a 'private estate' & a 'non private estate'. Or put another way, what does 'taken in charge' entail?

A private estate is an estate that isn't a council estate one that was not built by.the council. One that is made up of privately owned houses. Taken in charge means the council take over responsibility for the roads and services within the estate. Do you think it becomes a council estate or something? Was it you that was on a RA?

mr.wiggle

Sooo..just recieved my second letter of warning regarding non-payment of the household charge, threatening me with legal action.
Where can I go from here?
Paye worker, huge mortgage, family, bills mounting up and now this.
Stressed? Yes.
Depressed? Yes.
At my wits end? Absolutely.

Where do i go from here !?

Mr.W.

tayto lover

mr.wiggle wrote: »

Sooo..just recieved my second letter of warning regarding non-payment of the household charge, threatening me with legal action.
Where can I go from here?
Paye worker, huge mortgage, family, bills mounting up and now this.
Stressed? Yes.
Depressed? Yes.
At my wits end? Absolutely.

Where do i go from here !?

Mr.W.

Write back to the fcukers and tell them you are broke and already in debt. Offer them 50c a week, then you have at least tried and they can do feck all about it.

ncdadam

Unfortunately in our country there's a class of people, politicians and the mega rich, whose actions border on treason.

If the people who fought and died for our independence were alive today, there'd be blood running in the streets.

Enslaving the people to pay off the bankers and bondholders who used and abused our country will go down in history as one of the greatest wrongdoing's ever committed on the people of Ireland.

Yes, we have a deficit and yes, it has to be got under control, but we should remember why we have a deficit and why our economy collapsed.

The billions that we've borrowed to pay off bondholders and prop up bankrupt banks and the interest we will have to pay will sink this country.

Our own economy is dying, if not already dead but the bondholders and the bankers are happy.

Shame on fianna fail for getting the economy into this mess and shame on fine gael for lying to get into power and then continuing fianna fail's failed policy's.

Ghandee

dvpower wrote: »

That's the equivilent of the HHC just for landscaping.
What happens to residents who decide its unfair and decide that they're not paying?

We carry on without them, no biggie tbh.
Though very few in the estate refuse to pay, as they generally can see where their money is spent, and are in general happy with the services they receive.

lugha

tayto lover wrote: »

Yes they closed down a good business today over the Revenue being owed half a million and put 400 out of work while Mick the T.D. continues on in his job and he owing millions.

Perhaps you’d forgotten but Mick the T.D. (who don’t forget in on YOUR side in not paying the HHC) offered exactly this reason (protecting jobs) for not paying his dues so it appears that you are cherry picking a bit here. FWIW, I think a moment’s reflection would tell you what every business in the country would do if the revenue adopted a position of tolerating defaulters if it meant jobs would be saved.

And of course it is absolutely gob smacking hypocrisy for someone who declines to pay taxes / charges that they are obliged to by the state and then criticise someone else for doing exactly the same thing, would you not agree?

ncdadam wrote: »

Yes, we have a deficit and yes, it has to be got under control, but we should remember why we have a deficit and why our economy collapsed.

The billions that we've borrowed to pay off bondholders and prop up bankrupt banks and the interest we will have to pay will sink this country.

Not true. With or without the bailout and bondholders we would still have a massive deficit.

Ghandee

lugha wrote: »

Perhaps you’d forgotten but Mick the T.D. (who don’t forget in on YOUR side in not paying the HHC) offered exactly this reason (protecting jobs) for not paying his dues so it appears that you are cherry picking a bit here. FWIW, I think a moment’s reflection would tell you what every business in the country would do if the revenue adopted a position of tolerating defaulters if it meant jobs would be saved.

And of course it is absolutely gob smacking hypocrisy for someone who declines to pay taxes / charges that they are obliged to by the state and then criticise someone else for doing exactly the same thing, would you not agree?



Not true. With or without the bailout and bondholders we would still have a massive

But the deficit would be how many billions less?

1.6 billion getting paid over in a period of less than thirty days in sept-Oct alone. Billions that could have and should have been refused.

Hijpo

politicians and the mega rich are above the deficit

ncdadam

lugha wrote: »

Perhaps you’d forgotten but Mick the T.D. (who don’t forget in on YOUR side in not paying the HHC) offered exactly this reason (protecting jobs) for not paying his dues so it appears that you are cherry picking a bit here. FWIW, I think a moment’s reflection would tell you what every business in the country would do if the revenue adopted a position of tolerating defaulters if it meant jobs would be saved.

And of course it is absolutely gob smacking hypocrisy for someone who declines to pay taxes / charges that they are obliged to by the state and then criticise someone else for doing exactly the same thing, would you not agree?



Not true. With or without the bailout and bondholders we would still have a massive deficit.

How much have we paid to unsecured bondholders in the last 4 years?

Money that we are borrowing to do so.

How much interest does that accrue every year?

ncdadam

Hijpo wrote: »

politicians and the mega rich are above the deficit

They have a deficit ok, a moral deficit!