Irish Water Discussion {MERGE}

sesswhat

sesswhat wrote: »

A new water main passes close to my property on the public road.

However, my supply is connected to an old scheme run by the local council with all the pipework on private land. As new houses were built, they all tapped into the pipes where they ran behind the sites.

Ultimately the pipes go back to a reservoir maintained by the council and fed by the public water supply. Back in the 70's and 80's there was a charge for users of about £200/year but since then there have been no charges (I think there is an allowance per user but as they have no way of knowing who uses the water they must simply add up the allowances).

When the representative from Irish Water was asked about council run group schemes on a radio interview she was a bit vague about their plans for them but said they would probably take them over in the long run.

My question is whether I am a customer of Irish Water or not at this time?

I get from water from a group scheme but ultimately from the public mains as well.

(I have a septic tank so waste water does not apply)

Update:
I found a bill my neighbour kept from 1996 from Donegal County Council, so obviously it is a council controlled scheme even though the pipework goes through private land, and new house owners simply tap into the nearest pipe to connect themselves. I imagine this puts me firmly into the 'Public water main' category.

The system would be very hard to meter and police so I don't know if Irish Water will eventually reconnect all properties to new mains pipes along the public road instead.

It will be interesting to see which way this will go.
http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/company-asks-high-court-to-restrain-people-from-interfering-with-water-meter-installation-30600010.html

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/temporary-court-injunction-granted-against-water-meter-protesters-30601021.html

Temporary injunction granted.

Timberrrrrrrr

[Deleted User] wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/temporary-court-injunction-granted-against-water-meter-protesters-30601021.html

Temporary injunction granted.

Good


Hopefully by next week it will be permanent.

Losty Dublin

Deleted User wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/courts/temporary-court-injunction-granted-against-water-meter-protesters-30601021.html

Temporary injunction granted.

Lots of FB posts with plenty of "They paid off the judge" and "I don't care, I'm still not consenting." type comments.

Grolschevik

More Facebook guff about the rights of Irish Water. This guy says he asked his TD, apparently, who confirmed the nefarious truth!

TheChizler

Funny how TDs are always liars apparently, except when they agree with you.

GerardKeating

TheChizler wrote: »

Funny how TDs are always liars apparently, except when they agree with you.

Also "funny" that he did not actually name this TD.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Ogham

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Yep - they still want the PPS for the free allowance. The free 30000l allowance is for both water and waste. If you are only a customer for waste water - you won't be metered so you will always pay a flat rate (assessed charge). The "assesed charge" is based on the number of adults you declare on the "application form" . That flat rate will increase by €73 per house.

See the proposed assessed charges here http://www.moneyguideireland.com/unmetered-water-charges-how-will-it-work.html

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Ogham

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

It would - in the same way it would pay to lie about income or savings when claiming benefits

conorh91

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Difficult to do in practice, since I would assume information is shared with Revenue and Welfare, and almost everyone, except illegal workers and students, will be on one of those systems.

Losty Dublin

Seven anti-meter protestors are apparently up in the High Court on Wednesday. I am not sure if it's a hearing in relation to the temporary injunction granted to Sierra on Saturday or if they have breached it; all I know is that they are brandishing the pitchforks and pikes trying to get a baying mob for the day.

Ben must be proud.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

Carawaystick

Why don't the freemen just add their own terms and conditions to this
http://www.water.ie/docs/General-Conditions-for-a-Water-and-Wastewater-connection.pdf

I didn't get a copy of this doc with my letter from IW, I wonder if they're trying to hide it...

I like section 1.28 where IW can update the terms and conditions at any time by publishing it on their website...

section 1.10.5 seems to prevent me giving anyone a drink of water, with written permission from IW....
in fact section
1.10.1 prevents me from using the water for anything other than what IW lets me do.

Section 1.95 seems to prevent using a toilet...

Timberrrrrrrr

Carawaystick wrote: »

Why don't the freemen just add their own terms and conditions to this
http://www.water.ie/docs/General-Conditions-for-a-Water-and-Wastewater-connection.pdf

I didn't get a copy of this doc with my letter from IW, I wonder if they're trying to hide it...

I like section 1.28 where IW can update the terms and conditions at any time by publishing it on their website...

As can most service providers.

section 1.10.5 seems to prevent me giving anyone a drink of water, with written permission from IW....

Where does it say that?

The Customer shall avoid waste in the use of water
at any time, but especially in time of drought or
water scarcity and shall not give or sell water,
without the prior consent of Irish Water in writing.
For the purposes of conserving water, where Irish
Water has reason to believe that the management,
consumption or other use of water on a Premises
allows water to be wasted or fails to prevent water
from being wasted or causes water to be consumed
in excessive amounts, Irish Water may by notice
direct the Customer of the Premises to take such
corrective action (including installation, repair or
replacement of specified pipes, valves or meters
and other accessories, or change in operating
practice in relation to the management or use of
water) as Irish Water considers necessary

1.10.1 prevents me from using the water for anything other than what IW lets me do.

Yes so you can't set up a car wash outside of your house.

The Customer shall not use water supplied to the
Premises for any purpose other than that specified
by Irish Water without Irish Water’s prior written
consent which may be refused or granted at its
sole discretion.

Section 1.95 seems to prevent using a toilet...

Now you're just making things up :rolleyes:

Without prejudice to any licencing obligations,
the Customer shall not permit the following to be
discharged into the Wastewater Works:
(a) any liquid matter or thing which is or may
be liable to set or congeal in the Sewer or by
which the free flow of Sewage may otherwise
be interfered with, or is capable of giving off
any flammable or explosive gas or any noxious
odour in sufficient concentration to cause
a nuisance;
(b) Wastewater which by nature of volume or
composition is likely to adversely affect the
performance of a wastewater treatment plant(s)
of Irish Water;
(c) any acid, alkali or other substance in sufficient
concentration to cause corrosion to Sewer
network components;
(d) any matter that causes or is likely to cause a risk
to human health or safety or the environment.

Carawaystick

section 1.10.5

IW wrote:

The Customer ... and shall not give ... water,
without the prior consent of Irish Water in writing.

Re section 1.10.1 Planning regulations would decide about a car wash. Plenty of garages use rainwater capture as it is.
IW don't seem to provide a list of broad allowed uses, or a narrow list of uses they don't want you to use their water for.
Re-reading this, it would seem like as IW haven't given written permission to fill a kettle, then pretty much all use is banned...

IW wrote:

The Customer shall not use water supplied to the
Premises for any purpose other than that specified
by Irish Water without Irish Water’s prior written
consent which may be refused or granted at its
sole discretion.

IW wrote:

Without prejudice to any licencing obligations,
the Customer shall not permit the following to be
discharged into the Wastewater Works:
...
(d) any matter that causes or is likely to cause a risk
to human health or safety or the environment.

Now, I'd consider faeces to be likely to cause a risk to the environment, especially if it rains and IW allow raw sewage to pollute beaches all over Fingal, or in the case of Arklow, allow raw sewage flow into the River Avoca.

Timberrrrrrrr

Carawaystick wrote: »

section 1.10.5

Re section 1.10.1 Planning regulations would decide about a car wash. Plenty of garages use rainwater capture as it is.
IW don't seem to provide a list of broad allowed uses, or a narrow list of uses they don't want you to use their water for.
Re-reading this, it would seem like as IW haven't given written permission to fill a kettle, then pretty much all use is banned...





Now, I'd consider faeces to be likely to cause a risk to the environment, especially if it rains and IW allow raw sewage to pollute beaches all over Fingal, or in the case of Arklow, allow raw sewage flow into the River Avoca.

Yeah



Ok


You can sit there interpreting selectively quoting till you're blue in the face, It still won't mean that you are right.

Little CuChulainn

I just rang Irish Water about Section 1.10.1 and asked where the specified allowed uses are outlined. They aren't outlined anywhere.

Losty Dublin

TV3 is showing a documentary this evening at 9PM about Irish Water called Water; Why Pay for It. Should be on the 3Player later on as well.

Johnboy1951

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Yes so you can't set up a car wash outside of your house.


Now you're just making things up :rolleyes:

Can you please point out where that is written?

We are speaking of a legal contract here, so presumably you have some reference to provide ...... or ......

Carawaystick

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

As can most service providers.

si27_1995 wrote:

Section 3(2)
For the purpose of these Regulations a contractual term shall be regarded as unfair if, contrary to the requirement of good faith, it causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations under the contract to the detriment of the consumer, taking into account the nature of the goods or services for which the contract was concluded and all circumstances attending the conclusion of the contract and all other terms of the contract or of another contract on which it is dependent.

Now if IW can unilaterally change the terms of the contract, and not notify the consumer, that would seem to me to be a significant imbalance, to the detriment of the consumer.

in fact schedule 3 (1) (j) of the regulations si27/1995 specifically state

si27_1995 wrote:

enabling the seller or supplier to alter the terms of the contract unilaterally without a valid reason which is specified in the contract

Five Lamps

Carawaystick wrote: »

Now if IW can unilaterally change the terms of the contract, and not notify the consumer, that would seem to me to be a significant imbalance, to the detriment of the consumer.

in fact schedule 3 (1) (j) of the regulations si27/1995 specifically state

si27_1995 wrote:

enabling the seller or supplier to alter the terms of the contract unilaterally without a valid reason which is specified in the contract

In the past, companies would publish changes to T&C's by way of newspaper advertisements so this is no different.

It doesn't necessarily mean that they won't inform companies by other means.

Irish Water is a monopoly. Most water companies are. We have 26+ water companies currently operating in Ireland that are hugely inefficient so abolishing them into a single monopoly is a benefit.

Carawaystick

Five Lamps wrote: »

Carawaystick wrote: »

Now if IW can unilaterally change the terms of the contract, and not notify the consumer, that would seem to me to be a significant imbalance, to the detriment of the consumer.

in fact schedule 3 (1) (j) of the regulations si27/1995 specifically state

In the past, companies would publish changes to T&C's by way of newspaper advertisements so this is no different.

It doesn't necessarily mean that they won't inform companies by other means.

The fact stuff happened in the past doesn't seem to make this valid. I think it's fairly clear that the European Communities (Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts) regs make any significantly imbalanced to the detriment of the consumer term unfair and invalid. IW have spent a lot of money getting setup, they should have got their ducks in a row here.

hullaballoo

Moderator: can we please make sure to parse quotes properly. The logic is straightforward enough. Every time you open a quote tag, you close it.

E.g. [noparse]

User23948 wrote:

hullaballoo's a pedantic fcuker

[/noparse]

will give you:

User23948 wrote:

hullaballoo's a pedantic fcuker

E.g. #2 [noparse]

User98423 wrote:

User23984 wrote:

hullaballoo's a pedantic fcuker

You're not wrong there!

[/noparse]

will give you:

User98423 wrote:

User23984 wrote:

hullaballoo's a pedantic fcuker

You're not wrong there!

Broken quote tags really mess with the format and flow of discussion. If you've gotten it wrong, please edit it. If you see someone else has gotten it wrong either don't quote them or fix what's broken when you do.

Losty Dublin

A report on todays hearing in the High Court. You can guess which way the anti meter side will read this.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0924/647711-water/

Johnboy1951

Losty Dublin wrote: »

A report on todays hearing in the High Court. You can guess which way the anti meter side will read this.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2014/0924/647711-water/

The High Court has lifted an injunction against nine water charge protesters after they gave an undertaking not to engage in any unlawful activity such as obstruction, assault or harassment of meter installation workers in Dublin.

However, the court has continued a general injunction against all others who engage in such activity.

Does that mean those nine are allowed to protest (peacefully) but no one else is?

I must be misinterpreting it ......

Bepolite

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Does that mean those nine are allowed to protest (peacefully) but no one else is?

I must be misinterpreting it ......

The injunction is an odd one and the counsel quoted in the article is correct in saying that the injunction is simply barring people from doing things they could be arrested for. So no it does not mean no one can protest, it just means that no one can assault, obstruct etc. The people involved have had that injunction against them lifted, for on other reason really than they challenged it.

In general it's my understanding undertakings ref injunctions can involve the agreement to pay damages if breached.

Pro Hoc Vice

Bepolite wrote: »

The injunction is an odd one and the counsel quoted in the article is correct in saying that the injunction is simply barring people from doing things they could be arrested for. So no it does not mean no one can protest, it just means that no one can assault, obstruct etc. The people involved have had that injunction against them lifted, for on other reason really than they challenged it.

In general it's my understanding undertakings ref injunctions can involve the agreement to pay damages if breached.

The injunction was lifted as against 9 people who agreed to enter into an undertaking that is the same as the injunction. So they did not challange it they accepted it, breach of an undertaking is contempt of court it's not just damages its jail time than you very much.