Getting evicted for boycotting Irish Water - Mod Warnings post #29, 95 & 108

galljga1

foggy_lad wrote: »

OP Have you received a bill in your name for Water?

How many flats or separate people are living in the building? Is this going to be the latest scam by rack-rent landlords where they get one single bill for all ten or more flats at an address but they charge all their tenants the bill amount and pocket the bill money? the bill you were shown is obviously for the landlord and is in his name so despite it being a condition of the lease it is not an enforceable condition as it would be unlawful to compel you to pay it.

Tell the agent that you will pay all bills in your name!

Make foggy assumptions much?

runawaybishop

John Canyon wrote: »

Snip

That support and 1 euro will buy you a moro you can eat as you wait for your court appearance. People get evicted for non payment of services all the time.

Zaph

So you get evicted and somehow manage to find somewhere else to rent where your new landlord doesn't look for references from your current one. And several months down the road a water bill comes in the door. What then? Continue on an endless cycle of evictions and flat-hunting all because of a point of principle? As has already been mentioned, any future leases will oblige you to pay all bills, and some may explicitly mention water bills like your current one does. If you owned your own home you could take whatever stance you like and accept the consequences, but when you're renting you don't have that luxury. Someone else isn't going to pay your bills for you, and if you don't pay up they're going to evict you from their property and find a new tenant who will pay their bills. It really is as simple as that.

The_Conductor

gctest50 wrote: »

no no no - i think if you get evicted for not paying your water charge

http://www.right2water.ie/

give you a new place to stay and come around with a van to help you move n stuff

might be wrong though

Comedian.....

The current law- as it stands- is that the owner of the property is liable for the water charges. There is an amendment to the Act in the works at the moment- and its expected to be enacted before the Dáil rises for the summer recess. According to the Minister it will enable landlords withold any non-paid water bills from deposits- and it suggests that Irish Water will have an preferred status when the deposit is being witheld (i.e. Irish Water will be paid from tenant's deposits, before any other deductions from deposits take place). The Irish Landlord and Tenant's Associations- have, rather uniquely, united in protest against this proposal- however, its still there- unless the Minister decides otherwise.

So- Landlord is currently liable- however, the onus is on the tenant- and the legislation has not been amended yet, to remove any charges a landlord may put on the deposit in lieu of the non-payment of water bills.

Essentially- you are going to pay for your water in one manner, or another. If you're not willing to pay it upfront (which also enables you to claim the bribe- the 100 Euro rebate)- it gets deducted from your deposit in full- and you get no rebate.

You may not like Irish Water- as do many others. Its a utility. Water is a utility. Traditionally we paid for it via our income tax system. Now- instead- we're paying directly, and will, in turn, receive a rebate (of 100 per year on a 250 Euro bill) and hopefully tax cuts.

emeldc

foggy_lad wrote: »

OP Have you received a bill in your name for Water?

How many flats or separate people are living in the building? Is this going to be the latest scam by rack-rent landlords where they get one single bill for all ten or more flats at an address but they charge all their tenants the bill amount and pocket the bill money? the bill you were shown is obviously for the landlord and is in his name so despite it being a condition of the lease it is not an enforceable condition as it would be unlawful to compel you to pay it.

Tell the agent that you will pay all bills in your name!

For once foggy I have to say that I agree with you. The whole landlord/tenant/water thing is a fiasco. There was someone on the radio the other day saying that they didn't know who would ultimately be saddled with the bill. As far as I know there is nothing in law that says either is ultimately liable. Probably the tenant but who's going to chase him. There is also the issue of the €100 'voucher'. Who gets that in this case, tenant or landlord.

emeldc

The_Conductor wrote: »

Comedian.....

The current law- as it stands- is that the owner of the property is liable for the water charges. There is an amendment to the Act in the works at the moment- and its expected to be enacted before the Dáil rises for the summer recess. According to the Minister it will enable landlords withold any non-paid water bills from deposits- and it suggests that Irish Water will have an preferred status when the deposit is being witheld (i.e. Irish Water will be paid from tenant's deposits, before any other deductions from deposits take place). The Irish Landlord and Tenant's Associations- have, rather uniquely, united in protest against this proposal- however, its still there- unless the Minister decides otherwise.

So- Landlord is currently liable- however, the onus is on the tenant- and the legislation has not been amended yet, to remove any charges a landlord may put on the deposit in lieu of the non-payment of water bills.

Essentially- you are going to pay for your water in one manner, or another. If you're not willing to pay it upfront (which also enables you to claim the bribe- the 100 Euro rebate)- it gets deducted from your deposit in full- and you get no rebate.

You may not like Irish Water- as do many others. Its a utility. Water is a utility. Traditionally we paid for it via our income tax system. Now- instead- we're paying directly, and will, in turn, receive a rebate (of 100 per year on a 250 Euro bill) and hopefully tax cuts.

That's great. Everyone in the Dail is assuming that there will be a deposit left at the end in which to make said deductions. Tenants are not stupid.
I will pay my water charges but I will never pay a utility bill for my tenant.

Victor

daoruisce wrote: »

I have gone home, read the lease and it does say "to pay all rates and water charges (if any) relating to the property including any which are imposed after the date of this agreement", however, even after reading that am still shocked that I am being evicted for not paying the water charge.

Ghandi told his followers that if they wished to engage in civil disobedience, that they must be willing to take the consequences.

Arbiter of Good Taste

OP it's very easy to be principled when someone else is left with your bill, isn't it? Get out and buy your own house if you want to take a stand. You signed a lease agreeing to pay your water bill. So pay it or be evicted. You are not a victim in this scenario.

foggy_lad

The_Conductor wrote: »

Comedian.....

The current law- as it stands- is that the owner of the property is liable for the water charges.

The owner is fully liable BUT only until they inform Irish Water that there is a tenant in the property, once that happens the landlord can't be charged for any period they show that there was tenants living in the property!

There is an amendment to the Act in the works at the moment- and its expected to be enacted before the Dáil rises for the summer recess. According to the Minister it will enable landlords withold any non-paid water bills from deposits- and it suggests that Irish Water will have an preferred status when the deposit is being witheld (i.e. Irish Water will be paid from tenant's deposits, before any other deductions from deposits take place). The Irish Landlord and Tenant's Associations- have, rather uniquely, united in protest against this proposal- however, its still there- unless the Minister decides otherwise.

Such an ammendment will never pass as it would not be constitutional.

So- Landlord is currently liable- however, the onus is on the tenant- and the legislation has not been amended yet, to remove any charges a landlord may put on the deposit in lieu of the non-payment of water bills.

once any landlord informs irish water of the name of their tenant they are no longer in any way liable for water taxes for their property even if the charges remain unpaid and they want to sell the property!

Essentially- you are going to pay for your water in one manner, or another. If you're not willing to pay it upfront (which also enables you to claim the bribe- the 100 Euro rebate)- it gets deducted from your deposit in full- and you get no rebate.

all this talk of stealing from deposits and other nonsense is straight from the mouths of the many ministers who have made nonsense statements about how the water taxes were going to be collected and how people can be forced to pay.

If you rent a house your landlord can not be chased up by the gas or electricity company or by the phone company if you do a bunk owing them thousands! Irish Water is exactly the same and any kind of favouritism towards them will be shot down by lawyers and also by Europe as it will be anti-competitive.

You may not like Irish Water- as do many others. Its a utility. Water is a utility. Traditionally we paid for it via our income tax system. Now- instead- we're paying directly, and will, in turn, receive a rebate (of 100 per year on a 250 Euro bill) and hopefully tax cuts.

But if a person does not pay there is very little that can be done apart from taking them individually through the courts as they have already stated they will not be cutting the supply!

foggy_lad

Arbiter of Good Taste wrote: »

OP it's very easy to be principled when someone else is left with your bill, isn't it? Get out and buy your own house if you want to take a stand. You signed a lease agreeing to pay your water bill. So pay it or be evicted. You are not a victim in this scenario.

Whatever about paying your own water bill OP make sure you do not pay any bill in someone elses name! if the landlord wants the bill paid by you then it must be in your name!

NIMAN

The absence of the OP since Page1 of this thread perhaps points out that they know that they are in the wrong.

ukoda

I'm always a bit suspicious when people start a post with "i was asked to do something weird but i didn't question it and went along with it blindly"

theres no hope in hell id go to a letting agents office for a meeting with no idea of what its about and my bank details in my pocket without asking a single question.

johnnyskeleton

Zaph wrote: »

So you get evicted and somehow manage to find somewhere else to rent where your new landlord doesn't look for references from your current one. And several months down the road a water bill comes in the door. What then? Continue on an endless cycle of evictions and flat-hunting all because of a point of principle?

I suppose he could find a property with fluvial rights and a septic tank. Or set up a private water company. Or buy bottled water.

emeldc

NIMAN wrote: »

The absence of the OP since Page1 of this thread perhaps points out that they know that they are in the wrong.

The OP isn't wrong. He may be liable for a water bill, but just not that water bill. It's not in his name FFS.
If you get a bill with your address but someone else's name on it, would you pay it?

InTheTrees

emeldc wrote: »

The OP isn't wrong. He may be liable for a water bill, but just not that water bill. It's not in his name FFS.
If you get a bill with your address but someone else's name on it, would you pay it?

I wouldnt fixate too much on names. The lease says the tennant is liable for bills and charges.

He would have to prove he didn't use any of the water to avoid liability.

NIMAN

The OP must be out flat hunting.

endacl

TheDriver wrote: »

Moronic high ground vs get kicked out for not paying bills?

Better.

endacl

NIMAN wrote: »

The absence of the OP since Page1 of this thread perhaps points out that they know that they are in the wrong.

Or....

Why would he have to pay water charges living under a bridge?

galljga1

endacl wrote: »

Or....

Why would he have to pay water charges living under a bridge?

Nice one.

uck51js9zml2yt

endacl wrote: »

Or....

Why would he have to pay water charges living under a bridge?

Only if he used the water.

The_Conductor

emeldc wrote: »

For once foggy I have to say that I agree with you. The whole landlord/tenant/water thing is a fiasco. There was someone on the radio the other day saying that they didn't know who would ultimately be saddled with the bill. As far as I know there is nothing in law that says either is ultimately liable. Probably the tenant but who's going to chase him. There is also the issue of the €100 'voucher'. Who gets that in this case, tenant or landlord.

The voucher is paid to the billpayer. Each bill will have a reference associated with it. A payee will require the unique reference, along with their PPSN (to ensure their own 'uniqueness' to claim the bribe (err voucher). DSP, while they have outsourced the payment of the 'vouchers' are stating that they need to cross check it with the the PPSN- to ensure fraud is kept to a minimum. Privacy groups don't like this- as the use of PPSNs by Irish Water was one of the fiascos that underpinned its initial relationship with customers- and one of the most contentious. It was thought that this wouldn't be an issue if DSP were handling the 'vouchers'- but they weren't given the resources to manage it inhouse- and one of the callcentres who were on the list of tenders for Irish Water- won the contract to manage this transaction.

The idea is ultimately to have the account associated with the person, rather than the property- esp. until volume metering occurs (and esp. for volume metering- where there are unusual usage patterns- either very high- or also, in the case of holiday homes or occasional use properties- very low usage).

This is still not nailed down- and is supposed to be further expanded upon in the amendment Act- which is due to go through the Dáil.

The_Conductor

emeldc wrote: »

That's great. Everyone in the Dail is assuming that there will be a deposit left at the end in which to make said deductions. Tenants are not stupid.
I will pay my water charges but I will never pay a utility bill for my tenant.

The Landlord's Association have stated it will lead to higher deposits. The Minister doesn't seem to have an issue with this. In Dublin/Cork and increasingly Galway- these patterns of increased deposits are becoming the norm.

Until people get it into their heads that just because it rains a lot here- doesn't mean it magically gets transported into their taps as clean water- which is such a basic concept- and an abject failure on the part of Irish Water that they have failed to bring it down to these fundamental levels- then there are going to be increasingly hostile relationships between landlords over unpaid utility bills- and tenants who insist- water is a right, not a utility.

NIMAN

Some people will just refuse to accept anything that is said about water and the fact that we need to pay for it. They have gone so far now in the protest that not protesting more might be seen as failure, so they will keep going.

The fact that people got so annoyed over a €160 annual bill baffled me. No protests for the TV licence, or the USC which is a LOT more. Or many other cuts and taxes they could have protested against but some people just got a bee in their bonnet about this.

The_Conductor

foggy_lad wrote: »

The owner is fully liable BUT only until they inform Irish Water that there is a tenant in the property, once that happens the landlord can't be charged for any period they show that there was tenants living in the property!

Once they inform Irish Water of the tenancy in the property (and there is a proposal to allow Irish Water to liaise with the PRTB- who will have the tenancy registered)- they will then presumably chase the tenant. Until the bill is paid though- it remains associated with the property (note- the property- not necessarily the landlord- however, the landlord faces the risk of having a lien placed on the property in satisfaction of the unpaid bill). This has not changed.

foggy_lad wrote: »

Such an ammendment will never pass as it would not be constitutional. once any landlord informs irish water of the name of their tenant they are no longer in any way liable for water taxes for their property even if the charges remain unpaid and they want to sell the property!

I'm not going to argue whether its constitutional or not. Look at the current bill. Read the rumours of what will be in the amendment bill. The President has to sign it into law if it goes through the Dáil. The presumption is that a majority of the electorate have been suitably bribed to keep their silence- while many others have been bribed with the talk of tax cuts if expenditure by Irish Water is kept off the government balance sheets. Its a game of divide and conquer for the utility company, and the government. Its a game that has been played since ancient times.

foggy_lad wrote: »

all this talk of stealing from deposits and other nonsense is straight from the mouths of the many ministers who have made nonsense statements about how the water taxes were going to be collected and how people can be forced to pay.

Its not viewed as stealing though- and in most leases,there are already clauses that any unpaid utility bills be deducted from deposits. This is supposed to be a continuation.

foggy_lad wrote: »

If you rent a house your landlord can not be chased up by the gas or electricity company or by the phone company if you do a bunk owing them thousands! Irish Water is exactly the same and any kind of favouritism towards them will be shot down by lawyers and also by Europe as it will be anti-competitive.

You can have an interesting time transferring the utility into another person's name- and the billing practices of some of the companies (Bord Gáis for example) are now to have billing in such a way that there isn't a large quarterly bill for the winter period- for example. Utility companies do not like getting stiffed- and are getting better at mitigating losses. These schemes for minimising their losses can only get more stringent.

foggy_lad wrote: »

But if a person does not pay there is very little that can be done apart from taking them individually through the courts as they have already stated they will not be cutting the supply!

At the moment the sanction is to put a lien on the property with the outstanding bill. I.e. ultimately it would be a devaluation of the landlord's asset. Ultimately- whether it is required or not- for peace of mind- deposits will rise to cover any unpaid utility bills. Its common practice on the continent to photograph all utility meters when doing a final check with the landlord- and to base outstanding bills in this basis.

At the moment- the whole house of cards is contingent on a sufficient portion of the population being mollified by the 'voucher' (bribe) system- that the rest of the sheep (errr people) will follow.........

DanDublin1982

I dont rent but if I did I would have registered for IW and simply not paid when the bill came. How would the landlord ever have known then while I'm still in the property. The only reason landlords care about this is because bills are arriving in their names.

If the OP is still lurking here then I think you best start looking for a new place as I doubt your landlord is likely to be renewing your lease regardless of what you do at this point.

The_Conductor

NIMAN wrote: »

Some people will just refuse to accept anything that is said about water and the fact that we need to pay for it. They have gone so far now in the protest that not protesting more might be seen as failure, so they will keep going.

The fact that people got so annoyed over a €160 annual bill baffled me. No protests for the TV licence, or the USC which is a LOT more. Or many other cuts and taxes they could have protested against but some people just got a bee in their bonnet about this.

Even the IMF appear to be scratching their heads on this. They had imagined there would be civil unrest over other measures- but this one failed to generate any attention. In my opinion I firmly believe it to be less an expense and worry than many of the other measures- but it was simply the straw that broke the camels back. We don't protest very often here- it takes a hell of a lot to get people on the streets- and the continual never ending medicine being doled out, simply hit tipping point and eventually people exploded. It could just as easily have been the postponed broadcasting tax- or any of a number of other charges.

El_Duderino 09

While I have no sympathy for the Irish Water stance, I would be reluctant to pay any bill if I was refused a copy of that bill. Can that be legitimate?

Since the OP hasn't gotten back in the discussion, I suppose it might not be genuine.

Greenmachine

Pay your rent, you have no right to withhold it.

ted1

Steve012 wrote: »

Like you said, don't pay last months rent, your unlikely to get ur deposit back..
Similar situation on a job we were working on. Single mother refused to pay water charges, so the landlord, (millionaire) not that that matters, Ff..d her out... :mad:

What has the landlord precieved wealth got to do with anything ? If you want charity go to SVDeP

worded

Wash your hands of this OP