No refund for families who have paid water charges

Fr Tod Umptious

mickdw wrote: »

However the reality of the situation for many families is mounting bills for average properties in expensive areas.

I posted an article here a few years ago that showed stats that most wealth is Ireland was held in property, thus higher property tax, I'll dig it out again if I can.

But its not a good area for the left go down as the argument that the wealthy pay more can be easily made.

Here it is
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=85144837&postcount=1827

gladrags

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

None of that is to take away from the legitimate concerns about the high levels of pay and expenditure incurred in the setting up of Irish Water. There are serious problems about how it spent its money. But that cannot translate into "I won't pay for water".

The serious issues,have and do translate into a refusal to pay.

So much so,that the protests have uncovered serious flaws in IW,and its ability to perform as a utility,and a conservation savvy company.

StupidLikeAFox

Jack Killian wrote: »

0/10 for effort.

If FG are in power Dinny gets the profit
If FF are in power Bertie gets the profit
If SF are in power Slab gets the profit
If a decent party or set of decent independents is in power, we get a proper water system for our taxes

Maybe Slab could start up a side business smuggling water from one side of his farm to the other?

Lavinia

I sincerely want to believe that water charges will be revoked. It was a pure rip off from poor to rich anyway.
Would be interesting to see what will really happen and who will keep their promises in that regard, if anyone

xz

johnnyskeleton wrote:

If you have a private water scheme and a private waste system, you pay nothing to Irish Water and don't have to be a customer. You only pay for the service you obtain.

johnnyskeleton wrote:

None of that is to take away from the legitimate concerns about the high levels of pay and expenditure incurred in the setting up of Irish Water. There are serious problems about how it spent its money. But that cannot translate into "I won't pay for water".

I never stated that I won't pay, but with the current set up, I'm not paying.... I know they made numerous u-turns, but the fact that they wanted not only mine, but my whole families PPS numbers, was a deal breaker for me, no other utility company looks for that information,nor are they entitled to it

Jack Killian

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

If you have a private water scheme and a private waste system, you pay nothing to Irish Water and don't have to be a customer. You only pay for the service you obtain.

None of that is to take away from the legitimate concerns about the high levels of pay and expenditure incurred in the setting up of Irish Water. There are serious problems about how it spent its money. But that cannot translate into "I won't pay for water".

Untrue. My LPT went to Irish Water.

xz

gctest50 wrote:

Starting from before IW was set up :

gctest50 wrote:

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

gctest50 wrote:

1. ?

1. LPT...... That's what should be paying for it

Carlos Orange

mickdw wrote: »

The tax on peoples property, purchased with tax paid funds is borderline criminal.

Is this any different to VAT or stamp duty or VRT?

weldoninhio

Happened when they last tried to being in water charges. I told each and every one of my friends to pay nothing until after the election. Some said it was pointless and paid, others didn't pay and have said they owe me a pint. I'd almost guarantee there is something about it in the small print of the T and Cs you signed.

Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

august12

I work in the public service and am fed up of this quango. Its just another layer of bureaucracy to deal with. We, the staff of the local authority are still doing most of the work on a day to day basis. If the money which has been allocated to this new authority had been provided directly to each local authority, then the water issues we have wouldnt be in the state of disrepair they are now. I have no issue with a charge for water. I know the work which goes in to maintain and provide a quality water service, the problem is, lack of funding at local level. It amazes me, the never ending pot of gold to keep Irish Water afloat.

weldoninhio

gctest50 wrote: »

Starting from before IW was set up :

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

1. ?

1. I'm from North Co Dublin, so before I started charging people in that area (and there are many others around the country) I'd have it fixed so that raw, unfiltered, untreated sewage wasn't pumped out onto their beaches. Why pay for waste water when I can just walk for 5 mins and cr@p directly on the beach and cut out the middleman??

2. I'd go to the glorious Union we gain so much from being a part of and demand a grant to upgrade our failing water infrastructure. If that was turned down then the junior bondholders would have been told where to go and this money would have been used. I'd have a decent supply before I started charging people for it.

3. I would outsource the management and construction of our water systems to people from abroad who have implemented similar programmes in their countries with strict tender conditions and fines for not hitting KPIs.

4. I would have accepted the free meters from Siemens rather than paying millions to DOB for his ones.

5. From the get go, I would have a referendum stating that from this date any of Ireland's remaining natural resources could not be sold, and could only remain the sole property of the Irish state.

That's off the top of my head.

The Hurlers on the Ditch are still there and that's where they'll stay. They can shout all the nonsense they like, safe in the knowledge that they will never be called upon to implement their own ideas! All this furore over a few Euro extra a week when our Health service is at breaking point, as is our housing.

nhunter100

Deleted User wrote:

The Hurlers on the Ditch are still there and that's where they'll stay. They can shout all the nonsense they like, safe in the knowledge that they will never be called upon to implement their own ideas! All this furore over a few Euro extra a week when our Health service is at breaking point, as is our housing.

The LPT was only €2 a week according to Enda. Just saying...

Arkady

Deleted User wrote: »

The Hurlers on the Ditch are still there and that's where they'll stay. They can shout all the nonsense they like, safe in the knowledge that they will never be called upon to implement their own ideas! All this furore over a few Euro extra a week when our Health service is at breaking point, as is our housing.

When will you be getting off the ditch yourself and standing up to it ?
While billions were thrown away on Irish water contracts and jobs for cronies, and billions more given to pay off the private debts of bondholders and banks.

Arkady

Arkady wrote: »

When will you be getting off the ditch yourself and standing up to it ?
While billions were thrown away on Irish water contracts and jobs for cronies, and billions more given to pay off the private debts of bondholders and banks.

I am supporting the Country in the only way I can. By paying my taxes. And before you start on about paying twice, the same could be said for any service we use. We pay on our income via PAYE, we than pay VAT on goods and services.

I do not sit on the ditch whinging and belittling the hard work being done by others.

If you want to live in a civilised society, you pay your way. Those that cannot do so, due to whatever reasons, ill health, inability to obtain employment or age, we support through benefits derived from the taxes we pay. Expecting them to contribute a small amount to services they use is only right. Should we cut their benefits, or leave them the dignity of paying for the services they use out of those benefits? Personally, I prefer to leave them their dignity and hope that they see the benefits of getting involved in the running of the country.

nhunter100

Deleted User wrote:

I am supporting the Country in the only way I can. By paying my taxes. And before you start on about paying twice, the same could be said for any service we use. We pay on our income via PAYE, we than pay VAT on goods and services.

When did the water charges become a tax? If it's a tax surely it's a job for revenue to collect and thereby ensuring compliance oh and no privatisation. Win win.

oscarBravo

nhunter100 wrote: »

When did the water charges become a tax? If it's a tax surely it's a job for revenue to collect and thereby ensuring compliance oh and no privatisation. Win win.

If it's not a tax, then it's a utility bill, and all those who refused to pay it are freeloaders stealing water.

nhunter100

oscarBravo wrote:

If it's not a tax, then it's a utility bill, and all those who refused to pay it are freeloaders stealing water.

So just a question what was paying for water before FG's inspirational set up, the water faeries?Or maybe our taxes?Which?

tina1040

seamus wrote: »

Tenants who do not clear their bill on moving out will have the balance taken out of their deposits, as the landlord isn't going to pay it himself.

Landlords don't have to pay a tenant's unpaid bill so no need to deduct from deposits.

swampgas

nhunter100 wrote: »

So just a question what was paying for water before FG's inspirational set up, the water faeries?Or maybe our taxes?Which?

It wasn't working very well though, and was severely underfunded.

The need for a national organisation to manage water and waste treatment is undeniable.

The need to encourage conservation through metering and charges based on usage seems self-evident to me.

Or do you think we should let people waste all the water they like, and continue to dump untreated sewage into the sea?

xz

The party line being followed a lot here, or is it a case of, oh CRAP, people power is winning out and I didn't follow it

nhunter100

swampgas wrote:

Or do you think we should let people waste all the water they like, and continue to dump untreated sewage into the sea?

Care to share your evidence of people wasting all the water they like, no makey up stuff please.Thanks.

Arkady

Deleted User wrote: »

I am supporting the Country in the only way I can. By paying my taxes. And before you start on about paying twice, the same could be said for any service we use. We pay on our income via PAYE, we than pay VAT on goods and services.

I do not sit on the ditch whinging and belittling the hard work being done by others.

If you want to live in a civilised society, you pay your way. Those that cannot do so, due to whatever reasons, ill health, inability to obtain employment or age, we support through benefits derived from the taxes we pay. Expecting them to contribute a small amount to services they use is only right. Should we cut their benefits, or leave them the dignity of paying for the services they use out of those benefits? Personally, I prefer to leave them their dignity and hope that they see the benefits of getting involved in the running of the country.

I've always paid my taxes, and water charges and I'll continue to do so, it's doesn't give you the right to try and silence, cover up and gloss over the corruption and incompetence, and the diversion of billions away from the things you claim to care about to blatant croniesm, incompetence, and enrichment of the connected. You can sit on your ditch with your eyes closed and trying to silence other people who, who unlike yourself, have the balls and honesty to acknowledge it, and to speak out against it, but I won't be.

nhunter100

swampgas wrote:

It wasn't working very well though, and was severely underfunded.

The FG government cut funding for water services upon taking office.Also what conservation? A cap does not encourage conservation.Apartment dwellers will pay a fixed charge because it has been deemed to difficult to retro fit meters.

swampgas

nhunter100 wrote: »

Care to share your evidence of people wasting all the water they like, no makey up stuff please.Thanks.

Sometimes the waste happens unwittingly. Someone I know found his (new) meter ticking over when no water was being used and found a leak in the house which could have damaged the foundations of the house. It had been leaking for years, and only came to light with the meter.

Other times people leave taps running unnecessarily. When there's a risk of frost some people let their taps run all night in a vain attempt to stop them freezing up.

Clean, potable water is a precious resource. Significant effort goes into filtering it, testing it, and pumping it to your tap. If there's no incentive not to waste it, people will waste it. Maybe a little, maybe a lot, but unless there are meters in place we have no way of controlling it.

hmmm

mickdw wrote: »

However the reality of the situation for many families is mounting bills for average properties in expensive areas.

And in response we load more and more taxes on workers? We must be the only country in the world where the Left wants to put more taxes on workers, and less taxes on wealth. Seriously, is there a socialist/left leaning party anywhere else in the world that advocates taxing income over wealth?

As for the original point - if you do not refund people, if you reward people who avoid taxes and punish people who do pay their taxes, you are going to create a culture where people avoid paying any taxes or charges when any reasonably large political party in opposition pledge to abolish the charge. It's banana republic type stuff, and this isn't the 80s - we've grown up (somewhat) as a country.

nhunter100

swampgas wrote:

Sometimes the waste happens unwittingly. Someone I know found his (new) meter ticking over when no water was being used and found a leak in the house which could have damaged the foundations of the house. It had been leaking for years, and only came to light with the meter.

So someone you know...I asked for evidence, you know fact not something out of Enda's fables of the 'man with 2 pints'

ads20101

If / When water charges are abolished then one of two things will need to happen:

• Everyone that has paid water charges will need to be refunded

or

• Everyone that has not paid water charges must pay the amount they owe up to the point that the law is rescinded.

My rationale for this is:

• Despite the resistance to Irish water, it is the law of the land, it was entered onto the statute book and signed off legally
  
• I understand that some parties have stated that there would be no refunds (esp SF), but what they would essentially doing is proposing a law that specifically allows for the breaking of another law. Surely, in this case there would have to be some constitutional challenge.

oscarBravo

nhunter100 wrote: »

So just a question what was paying for water before FG's inspirational set up, the water faeries?Or maybe our taxes?Which?

Our taxes.

This seems to be an extremely complicated idea for some to grasp, so I'll try to explain it as clearly as I can.

Before there were water charges, the provision of clean drinking water still had to be paid for, so it came from taxes. With the introduction of water charges, the provision of clean drinking water gets paid for by the consumers through utility bills, so it no longer has to be paid for through taxes.

Once again: before water charges, taxes. After water charges, utility bills.

Got it?

swampgas

nhunter100 wrote: »

The FG government cut funding for water services upon taking office.Also what conservation? A cap does not encourage conservation.Apartment dwellers will pay a fixed charge because it has been deemed to difficult to retro fit meters.

I think the last government flip-flopped all over the place and I think FG and Labour were pulling in different directions. The end result was a mess of epic proportions.

The cap was a stupid idea that defeated the purpose of having metering in the first place. Apartments should be built with metering in mind. And retro-fitting shouldn't be that difficult - it's just a meter on a pipe, for heaven's sake. Are the plumbers in Ireland that incompetent that they can't figure out a way to do it? Is Ireland really selling itself as a country for hi-tech companies, yet we can't reroute a few water pipes? Give me a break.

swampgas

nhunter100 wrote: »

So someone you know...I asked for evidence, you know fact not something out of Enda's fables of the 'man with 2 pints'

:rolleyes:

Whatever dude.

seamus

tina1040 wrote: »

Landlords don't have to pay a tenant's unpaid bill so no need to deduct from deposits.

Unpaid charges become a lien on the property that can't be sold until they're cleared.

Landlords are not going to want this hassle.

nhunter100

ads20101 wrote:

If / When water charges are abolished then one of two things will need to happen: Everyone that has paid water charges will need to be refunded

Failing a refund there could always be a March to protest a lack of refund, I'm betting at least a million will attend such protests.Wonder what the charges would have been had it not been for the protests? I suspect a damn sight higher than what people paid

nhunter100

oscarBravo wrote:

Once again: before water charges, taxes. After water charges, utility bills.

So if I pay the water charge I'm in line for a tax refund? Correct?

B.A._Baracus

If the water charges get scrapped there won't be any refunds.

heyjude

hmmm wrote: »

As for the original point - if you do not refund people, if you reward people who avoid taxes and punish people who do pay their taxes

The flaw here is that the government went to great lengths to stress that they were introducing "Water Charges" not a "Water Tax" and the water charges were almost always sold by the pro charge lobby as being similar to your electric or gas bill, so the people who did not pay their water charge DID NOT avoid any tax and the people who paid DID NOT pay their taxes(as it applies to metered water).

It is not against the law not to pay your utility bill, whether it be electricity, gas or water, anymore than it is against the law not to make payments on your car or mortgage, so the frequently laid claim by the pro-water charge lobby that people who haven't paid the water charge are breaking the law is also false.

Similarly, do the pro-water lobby believe that nobody should have to repay bank loans just because some high profile individuals have had debt writeoffs ?

The government went to great lengths in attempting to claim that Irish Water was just another utility, independent from the government and now the same parties are trying to tar people with the label of tax avoiders. If Irish Water bills are tax bills, then it isn't a utility.

ads20101 wrote: »

If / When water charges are abolished then one of two things will need to happen:

• Everyone that has paid water charges will need to be refunded

or

• Everyone that has not paid water charges must pay the amount they owe up to the point that the law is rescinded.

My rationale for this is:

• Despite the resistance to Irish water, it is the law of the land, it was entered onto the statute book and signed off legally
  
• I understand that some parties have stated that there would be no refunds (esp SF), but what they would essentially doing is proposing a law that specifically allows for the breaking of another law. Surely, in this case there would have to be some constitutional challenge.

The formation of Irish Water is in the statute books, but not paying water charges is a civil rather than a criminal matter, so non payment isn't a breach of the law. Also in the 1980s-90s, there were water and bin collection charges levied in various parts of the country, those who paid were told that those who didn't would be pursued and forced to pay, but eventually the authorities just gave up and there was no refund to those that paid. So there is a clear precedent, they won't pass a law saying that those who didn't pay would be forced to pay, they'll just let it slide.

oscarBravo wrote: »

Once again: before water charges, taxes. After water charges, utility bills.

Got it?

I got it, before water charges - water was paid for through taxes (VAT, Motor Tax and more recently some LPT too) and after water charges, we still pay the same taxes, but we also get an extra utility bill.

Mr.Micro

What is it with this never ending water charges. The health service (HSE) is a total mess, housing crisis, homelessness, all the young people having to leave Ireland...still. All we hear about is water charges, refunds, non payment. It is truly unbeiievable. The issue was no doubt a major factor is the rejection of FG/Lab. Talk about priorities....not our strong suit.

weldoninhio

Mr.Micro wrote: »

What is it with this never ending water charges. The health service (HSE) is a total mess, housing crisis, homelessness, all the young people having to leave Ireland...still. All we hear about is water charges, refunds, non payment. It is truly unbeiievable. The issue was no doubt a major factor is the rejection of FG/Lab. Talk about priorities....not our strong suit.

It's a water charge thread buddy.

nhunter100

Mr.Micro wrote:

What is it with this never ending water charges. The health service (HSE) is a total mess, housing crisis, homelessness, all the young people having to leave Ireland...still. All we hear about is water charges, refunds, non payment. It is truly unbeiievable. The issue was no doubt a major factor is the rejection of FG/Lab. Talk about priorities....not our strong suit.

Organise a March/protest about the issues you've outlined someone has to lead no reason it can't be you. ; )

BailMeOut

heyjude wrote: »

we still pay the same taxes, but we also get an extra utility bill.

no we don't, tax on your income will fall and they have been falling. The point has been that we reduce reliance on income tax to pay for everything so during bust cycles the country can still fund itself. In the last two budgets your tax on income fell a little and if FG remained in power would would have fallen a lot more over the coming years assuming economy grew. That was the plan however does not work out very well for people who pay little to no income tax.

Bodhran

The bills for those who haven't paid their water charges should just be passed to Revenue to collect. They're the boys (& girls) who know how to get money out of people.

Arkady

Bodhran wrote: »

The bills for those who haven't paid their water charges should just be passed to Revenue to collect. They're the boys (& girls) who know how to get money out of people.

And yet it's claimed it's a charge not a tax.
Only unconnected working people. The elite and well connected pay either none or very little in taxes in Ireland.

ads20101

heyjude wrote: »

The flaw here is that the government went to great lengths to stress that they were introducing "Water Charges" not a "Water Tax" and the water charges were almost always sold by the pro charge lobby as being similar to your electric or gas bill, so the people who did not pay their water charge DID NOT avoid any tax and the people who paid DID NOT pay their taxes(as it applies to metered water).

It is not against the law not to pay your utility bill, whether it be electricity, gas or water, anymore than it is against the law not to make payments on your car or mortgage, so the frequently laid claim by the pro-water charge lobby that people who haven't paid the water charge are breaking the law is also false.

Similarly, do the pro-water lobby believe that nobody should have to repay bank loans just because some high profile individuals have had debt writeoffs ?

The government went to great lengths in attempting to claim that Irish Water was just another utility, independent from the government and now the same parties are trying to tar people with the label of tax avoiders. If Irish Water bills are tax bills, then it isn't a utility.



The formation of Irish Water is in the statute books, but not paying water charges is a civil rather than a criminal matter, so non payment isn't a breach of the law. Also in the 1980s-90s, there were water and bin collection charges levied in various parts of the country, those who paid were told that those who didn't would be pursued and forced to pay, but eventually the authorities just gave up and there was no refund to those that paid. So there is a clear precedent, they won't pass a law saying that those who didn't pay would be forced to pay, they'll just let it slide.



I got it, before water charges - water was paid for through taxes (VAT, Motor Tax and more recently some LPT too) and after water charges, we still pay the same taxes, but we also get an extra utility bill.

I hear what you are saying and understand that it is a charge not a tax, but I feel that this is essentially a moot point.

Whether it is clarified as a tax or a charge is essentially irrelevant, yes the revenue service has increased powers of collection, but that doesn't mean that the state would just give up on owed monies just because it is a utility. The necessity to pay the water bill was enshrined in law, therefore there is a legal responsibility to the tax payer to retrieve that money. I also acknowledge that the non payment of utilities was ignored in the past, but there are more structured ways of collection these days, such as debt collectors, a court order to claim payment directly from salaries or benefits. Additionally, if all that fails, then there are financial databases that can apply consequences to those who don't pay such as credit blacklisting where loans and mortgage applicants can be affected. In this debt ridden society, not being able to transact financially could really hurt.

For better or for worse the financial world has moved on in the last 20 years.

nhunter100

Bodhran wrote:

The bills for those who haven't paid their water charges should just be passed to Revenue to collect. They're the boys (& girls) who know how to get money out of people.

No privatisation so, sound. ; )

Mr.Micro

weldoninhio wrote: »

It's a water charge thread buddy.

No matter. The point is still the same, buddy. Justification of not paying for clean quality water for all, now and in the future. Instead, don't pay and leave it with the council guy, where quality is not guaranteed let alone sustainable. All the other issues I mentioned much more important, but let's all get hung up on water charges.

micosoft

screamer wrote: »

Water charges are not taxes and they are not legally enforceable as yet. So far people have opted in or out of paying.....
Course they wont refund any monies paid where would they get it from? It's long gone down the drain.

While not a tax, uniquely, IW cannot cut you off for non-payment. Non-payment of any other utility (Gas, Electricity) results in disconnection. That makes the current charging mechanism very different - no utility has that state decision taken. In my opinion a huge mistake.

Ash.J.Williams

Mr.Micro wrote: »

Do you really think that we can continue to supply water in a vague unregulated fashion, with no standardisation of quality or supply, as we move forward, or backwards as Ireland frequently does? Water charges will be in place one way or another, it is naive to believe otherwise.

That's what they should have done then instead of setting up a quagmire to raise funds to pay the bank debt

nhunter100

ads20101 wrote:

Whether it is clarified as a tax or a charge is essentially irrelevant, yes the revenue service has increased powers of collection, but that doesn't mean that the state would just give up on owed monies just because it is a utility. The necessity to pay the water bill was enshrined in law, therefore there is a legal responsibility to the tax payer to retrieve that money. I also acknowledge that the non payment of utilities was ignored in the past, but there are more structured ways of collection these days, such as debt collectors, a court order to claim payment directly from salaries or benefits. Additionally, if all that fails, then there are financial databases that can apply consequences to those who don't pay such as credit blacklisting where loans and mortgage applicants can be affected. In this debt ridden society, not being able to transact financially could really hurt.

Ah the scaremongering never ceases.You need to learn the difference between a bill/ charge and taxes it is very relevant. Particularly if you set up a company for eventual privatisation.

ads20101

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

That's what they should have done then instead of setting up a quagmire to raise funds to pay the bank debt

I'm not naive to think this was thought of as another stream of revenue, but the truth of the matter we are one of the few western european countries that did not have a specific national division to manage our essential water supply.

This is not something that was missed by the european union who has been putting more than a spot of pressure on several previous governments.

There are many reasons to regulate our water supply nationally, but the main one has to be the massive rate of waste of the clean water system.

weldoninhio

ads20101 wrote: »

I hear what you are saying and understand that it is a charge not a tax, but I feel that this is essentially a moot point.

Whether it is clarified as a tax or a charge is essentially irrelevant, yes the revenue service has increased powers of collection, but that doesn't mean that the state would just give up on owed monies just because it is a utility. The necessity to pay the water bill was enshrined in law, therefore there is a legal responsibility to the tax payer to retrieve that money. I also acknowledge that the non payment of utilities was ignored in the past, but there are more structured ways of collection these days, such as debt collectors, a court order to claim payment directly from salaries or benefits. Additionally, if all that fails, then there are financial databases that can apply consequences to those who don't pay such as credit blacklisting where loans and mortgage applicants can be affected. In this debt ridden society, not being able to transact financially could really hurt.

For better or for worse the financial world has moved on in the last 20 years.

It is a utility company completely seperate from the state is it not? The state has no recourse to chase people for money.