Water Bill.

Deise Vu

As I find it hard to be arsed about a Mickey Mouse charge like the water charge when I am paying about twenty times as much for a Universal Social Charge that is not universal, I was paying my water charge by direct debit. When Barry Cowen and Simon Coveney informed me that they would happily take my money if I continued to pay it but they wouldn't be giving it back any time soon I did what any sensible citizen would do and cancelled the Debit months ago. In fairness to me, even when I can easily afford it, it would be crazy to pay when FF and FG have joined the Everything Is Free Alliance.

When I checked online for my latest bill (having received an email that it was due) I checked it out and it is showing a zero liability and a zero payment for the current bill and my last one. Am I the only person this has happened to or is Irish Water already taking a pragmatic approach of not charging if they aren't going to get paid? I suppose if they keep trying to get Direct Debits that have been blocked they would incur serious bank charges for no return.

Ush1

jimgoose wrote: »

Your righty numpty mate here reckons he has a point! :pac:

Being glad to see the government take money erroneously from ordinary citizens?

smash

Deleted User wrote: »

We had this discussion on another thread and were confused as to when the fines kicked in. Is it €60 per year per bill - ie €60 x 4 or just one €60 per 12 month period. If people haven't registered or engaged with IW and the extra charge is per bill per year, they'd hit the €500 in less than a year.

If you've never registered, you have every right to treat their letters as junk mail.

Deleted User wrote: »

I am a supporter of the idea of water charges, so must warn people to keep in mind that the money will have to come from another source. In this case it appears to be the USC, meaning that the hard pressed middle income worker pays for all - again.

But this is scaremongering at best. It was being paid for through taxation before IW was set up. I agree that the allocation for water services wasn't managed properly but it was still being paid for. The money that has been sunk in to IW at this stage would have fixed most of the water issues in the country but instead we're left with a toxic company.

JustTheOne

We love a bit of irony.

FF create a mess that we need the troika to bail us out.

FF sign us up to water charges as part of this bailout.

Five years later FF say they will abolish water charges, the people swallow it and hey presto they are back in government.

Populism at its finest, we are a bunch of idiotic, couch swallowing, selfish clowns.

The mind boggles, we will never learn.

smash

smash wrote: »

If you've never registered, you have every right to treat their letters as junk mail.


But this is scaremongering at best. It was being paid for through taxation before IW was set up. I agree that the allocation for water services wasn't managed properly but it was still being paid for. The money that has been sunk in to IW at this stage would have fixed most of the water issues in the country but instead we're left with a toxic company.

We still have the company and we still have the charge. I would be careful about telling people to not pay, as it may have repercussions down the road.

IW has done great work since it was set up, despite this fact not suiting some.

Bin charges anyone? To people of a certain age there was a time when local authorities collected bins for FREE ( or paid out of central taxation ) Now we all pay bin charges of one sort or another.

Irish water is headed the same way.

I am not looking for my money back but I would like a credit against what every charges come in.

diomed

I was happy to pay water charges. We need good water services. I would be happy to let them keep the money I paid.
Property tax is much higher that water charges. Silence on that.

Have Fianna Fail hitched themselves onto the anti-water charges bandwagon so that they can collect cheap votes? Does that clean the slate of all Fianna Fail mis-management? (abolishing a necessary charge).

Back to the good old days of spend, spend, spend followed by begging Europe for a bit of help.

smash

Deleted User wrote: »

We still have the company and we still have the charge. I would be careful about telling people to not pay, as it may have repercussions down the road.

Such as? Come on... entertain me.

Deleted User wrote: »

IW has done great work since it was set up, despite this fact not suiting some.

You're having a laugh, right?

diomed wrote: »

I was happy to pay water charges. We need good water services. I would be happy to let them keep the money I paid.
Property tax is much higher that water charges. Silence on that.

It's only a matter of time before water charges are applied to property tax.

Anyone else notice something odd about the photo on the Independent website?

I mean, they probably had hundreds of photos of Enda Kenny. But the one they pick is him drinking a bottle of water. On an article about Irish Water.

Maybe I'm thinking too much about it, but it made me laugh.

jimgoose

Ush1 wrote: »

Being glad to see the government take less money erroneously from ordinary citizens?

:cool:

Redbishop

smash wrote: »

Such as? Come on... entertain me.


You're having a laugh, right?



It's only a matter of time before water charges are applied to property tax.

Any way you look at it though, anyone currently in arrears or who hasn't paid would be foolish to pay now.
There is going to be a commission set up to decide on the payment structure and timing.
No guarantee they will recommend re- introduction of charges and even if they do it might be with generous allowances that people if canny might never go over.
This to me at present looks like a shim sham face saving exercise to let FG sneak out the back door on the issue and at the same time try to salvage some kind of honour in the fact that they would be acting on the commissions advice, if that makes sense.
They lost the overall battle here and shrunk in the face of losing power.
No kudos from me on this one for them, or for FF for forcing them to it either.
Remember who first mooted these charges!

maudgonner

mariaalice wrote: »

Bin charges anyone? To people of a certain age there was a time when local authorities collected bins for FREE ( or paid out of central taxation ) Now we all pay bin charges of one sort or another.

Some local authorities did. Some people always paid for their bins.

Just like some people always paid charges for their water, in addition to central taxation.

mynameismud

Deleted User wrote: »

We had this discussion on another thread and were confused as to when the fines kicked in. Is it €60 per year per bill - ie €60 x 4 or just one €60 per 12 month period. If people haven't registered or engaged with IW and the extra charge is per bill per year, they'd hit the €500 in less than a year.

Incorrect,I've received my 5th bill last week,previous 4 remain unpaid and there is no extra penalties attached.

Cee-Jay-Cee

I didn't pay my water bills and glad I didn't and I have absolutely no intention of paying them.

Water is paid for through general taxation and motor tax. Unfortunately I'm one of those that cant afford a post 08 car with cheaper tax and have been paying €710 a year for my car for the last 6 years (in fact I have paid more as I can only afford 3 months at a time which works out at €800 a year)

I have more than enough paid for my fcuking water!!

Godge

Alf Stewart. wrote: »

Fergus O'Dowd disagrees with this.



That'd be Fergus of Fine Gael by the way.

Surely, to be accurate, your post should state "Fergus O'Dowd disagreed with this some years ago in a different context", rather than "Fergus O'Dowd disagrees with this"?

Baggy Trousers

jeamimus wrote: »

Don't pay now. FF have created an unholy mess that will take years to sort out, if ever. Meanwhile the long suffering taxpayer, not the actual user, will have to pay for this cock up.

Alan Dukes, former FG leader said this;

"A glorious, god-awful mess has been made of Irish Water. We've ended up with a system now that no rational person would have invented if they had sat down to put this kind of system together.
The hope must be that it will work lamely until some sort of coherent system is put in place."

Redbishop

smash wrote: »

If you've never registered, you have every right to treat their letters as junk mail.


But this is scaremongering at best. It was being paid for through taxation before IW was set up. I agree that the allocation for water services wasn't managed properly but it was still being paid for. The money that has been sunk in to IW at this stage would have fixed most of the water issues in the country but instead we're left with a toxic company.

I never registered with RTE but still have to pay my fcuking licence fee?

If you think that most of the water problems could have been fixed by the money spent so far on IW then all I can say is, there's no point arguing with you!
Not even close.

Redbishop

Baggy Trousers wrote: »

Alan Dukes, former FG leader said this;

Never seen that before, thanks!
Smilie.

Baggy Trousers

Redbishop wrote: »

Never seen that before, thanks!
Smilie.

You are most welcome Sir

Have a nice day Red.

mynameismud

JustTheOne wrote: »

Populism at its finest, we are a bunch of idiotic, couch swallowing, selfish clowns.

The mind boggles, we will never learn.

This should be the new slogan for FG

andekwarhola

Don't kid yourselves. The shortfall will just be tacked on to USC, property tax or whatever.

Irish Water was a corrupt and inept disaster but the money required for the raft of 'free' services so beloved of the Irish taxpayer (or indeed, the non taxpayer) will just be juggled from somewhere else, because, you know, they require this thing called money to provide.

smash

Redbishop wrote: »

I never registered with RTE but still have to pay my fcuking licence fee?

You don't pay your license to RTE.

Redbishop wrote: »

If you think that most of the water problems could have been fixed by the money spent so far on IW then all I can say is, there's no point arguing with you!
Not even close.

There was a video from the Oireachtas that I can't seem to find but it was embedded in an IW thread before. It had a member from Dublin County council giving a report regarding leaks and other issues with the systems in Dublin. The report gave costs and timelines and proved that the money spent on IW so far, far outweighed the costs needed to rectify the issues in Dublin at least.

IW could have been a good utility for the country, but it's a toxic organisation to the core and that's the issue that people have with it.

Uriel.

darkpagandeath wrote: »

Oh, When was Revenue collecting Water charges ?

are you saying that Revenue collects all of the State's taxes?

Seth Brundle

smash wrote: »

IW could have been a good utility for the country, but it's a toxic organisation to the core and that's the issue that people have with it.

How is IW toxic to the core?

andekwarhola

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

I didn't pay my water bills and glad I didn't and I have absolutely no intention of paying them.

Water is paid for through general taxation and motor tax. Unfortunately I'm one of those that cant afford a post 08 car with cheaper tax and have been paying €710 a year for my car for the last 6 years (in fact I have paid more as I can only afford 3 months at a time which works out at €800 a year)

I have more than enough paid for my fcuking water!!

Irish people don't like direct high taxes and vote accordingly, while still demanding comprehensive services.

That's why you get people that aren't even paying a massive amount of income tax (or people even barely in the tax net) and paying a few hundred quid a year motor tax then demanding XY top level service, the cost of which is then plugged up with stealth taxes.

That said, i wholly agree that a normal model of high tax and good state services is a pipe dream here because cronyism, ineptitude and unions make sure that even the relatively lavishly funded state services like health can't function properly.

And as such, a normal, sensible idea like a modest, billed, water service (with an emphasis on infrastructure and conservation) instead becomes a vested-interest, messy money-sink.

Petroglyph

Our landlord must have have given our details to IW. We never registered and also didn't take the grant. Current bill in the door is 200+.
Have bought our own place now and moving in next month. Unsure whether or not to contact them and tell them its pointless sending any more bills.

Baggy Trousers

Mr Freeze wrote: »

Wait till they ask people to give the 100 euro grant back?

That will be fun.

It actually costs €6,000,000 per year just to administer that €100 "conservation" grant. Disgraceful waste of money.

Baggy Trousers

The fact that civil disobedience triumphed is a turning point in our history and our democracy.
The politicians were taught a hard lesson in accountability. The superquango that Hogan set up was an arrogant insult
to every Irish person. Our trust for politicians is probably at all all time low now (despite FG's promised "new politics") .
Perhaps now we have moved away from the "learned helplessness" and future politicians will think twice before
pulling another dodgy stunt like IW.

the evasion_kid

Ush1 wrote: »

Well from what I understand there is an independant commision which will make a call in 9 months, so it's not gone yet. Did the IMF not mandate the introduction of water charges?

This what a lot of people seem to ignore,anyone that knows a bit about the IMF knows about their history of water privatisation(a condition of a bailout)and upping the price,it's never good,Bolivia springs to mind.

scamalert

The way i see it they will have massive shortfall for next of the year.

I didn't mind paying water bill since eventually it worked out to getting 100e back and 140 total per year.But After election all crap talks of government themselves not having a f**in clue and talking rubbish about possibly scrapping it, and people being left dry if something like that happened while not likely,but think its enough for many to postpone any payments before it gets sorted properly and everyone is paying.

In other words this wouldn't been a problem if government asked everyone in country to chip in 100e per house to upgrade existing water plants/facilities for a years time without digging trenches every 10 feet.
But when they hire outside contractors,let private company handle all the payments and spend millions euros in the process,sort of understand why some wont bother paying at all.

darkpagandeath

scamalert wrote: »

The way i see it they will have massive shortfall for next of the year.

I didn't mind paying water bill since eventually it worked out to getting 100e back and 140 total per year.But After election all crap talks of government themselves not having a f**in clue and talking rubbish about possibly scrapping it, and people being left dry if something like that happened while not likely,but think its enough for many to postpone any payments before it gets sorted properly and everyone is paying.

In other words this wouldn't been a problem if government asked everyone in country to chip in 100e per house to upgrade existing water plants/facilities for a years time without digging trenches every 10 feet.
But when they hire outside contractors,let private company handle all the payments and spend millions euros in the process,sort of understand why some wont bother paying at all.

The amount lost from billing residential is 300m Would not call that massive. And considering all the "Fiscal Space" and they were able to also remove 4bn from USC.

Alf Stewart.

Godge wrote: »

Surely, to be accurate, your post should state "Fergus O'Dowd disagreed with this some years ago in a different context", rather than "Fergus O'Dowd disagrees with this"?

Well no, the poster I quoted claimed FF made a mess of Irish Water, and Water charges. FF had no input into the formation of the company, as they were toast a few years by the time the company was formed, and the charging structure was implemented.

The mess that was made of both, as Fergus pointed out lay with its creators, and those who set the charging structure.

That's FG/Lab.

HensVassal

Ush1 wrote: »

Absolute joke.

I now have to listen to my lefty numpty mate about how wrong I was to pay and it serves me right.

Why did you pay it? Maybe you should listen to your lefty numpty mate a bit more often. If you can't think for yourself and follow the herd at least get a second opinion before you do as you're told.

HensVassal

Merrion wrote: »

I think non-payment of any bill can be put on your credit score even if it doesn't go to court so I'd suggest you do pay if you are looking to get any credit in the next year or so?

I'm going to send you an air bill. You better pay me or your credit score will suffer.

andekwarhola

Could be wrong but I'm almost sure non payment of any service bill does not affect credit rating and only gets you blacklisted or cut off from the service.

It's only bank stuff like missing loan, mortgage or credit card repayments that affects credit rating I thought.

Ush1

HensVassal wrote: »

Why did you pay it? Maybe you should listen to your lefty numpty mate a bit more often. If you can't think for yourself and follow the herd at least get a second opinion before you do as you're told.

I paid it because it's the law and I agree the water infrastructure needs investment.

Also it's not gone, and you and my left numpty mate may be made to pay yet.

HensVassal

diomed wrote: »

I was happy to pay water charges. We need good water services. I would be happy to let them keep the money I paid.
Property tax is much higher that water charges. Silence on that.

Have Fianna Fail hitched themselves onto the anti-water charges bandwagon so that they can collect cheap votes? Does that clean the slate of all Fianna Fail mis-management? (abolishing a necessary charge).

Back to the good old days of spend, spend, spend followed by begging Europe for a bit of help.

Just goes to prove that it's a hell of a lot easier to scam somebody than to get them to admit that they were scammed.

jimgoose

Ush1 wrote: »

I paid it because it's the law and I agree the water infrastructure needs investment.

Also it's not gone, and you and my left numpty mate may be made to pay yet.

We understand it's the law. That's no excuse. Government by, of, for and with the consent of, the governed, remember? Occasionally some people need to be reminded of what exactly "The State" is, and what it is for. I'd consider this a cheap lesson by comparison with what usually happens when a population decides it's had quite enough of "The State".

Ush1

jimgoose wrote: »

We understand it's the law. That's no excuse. Government by, of, for and with the consent of, the governed, remember? Occasionally some people need to be reminded of what exactly "The State" is, and what it is for. I'd consider this a cheap lesson by comparison with what usually happens when a population decides it's had quite enough of "The State".

What lesson? There is a commision to make a call on it in 9 months. Somebodies going to pay one way or another.

jimgoose

Ush1 wrote: »

What lesson? There is a commision to make a call on it in 9 months. Somebodies going to pay one way or another.

The fact that since the general election the majority of elected TDs are so on a platform of rejecting the water setup in it's current form, thus forcing Mad O'Duffy and his jackbooted know-it-all pals to back the fuck off if they want to see Leinster House again in the next five years. Somebody always pays one way or another - tell me about it, it's usually me and those like me. But, loud and clear, not like this.

wokingvoter

I supported the water charges. I want clean water for my daughter, her children, her grandchildren. I thought €5 per house per week was very fair.
I'm fully paid up but now I swear on my child's life I will never ever pay another penny for water.
They will either come back next year and say that I have to pay because I'm enough of a mug to go to work, but the girl next door, with 2 kids on OPFP, who has just pushed her buggy past my window nursing her iPhone 6 under her chin while she lights another fag, doesn't have to.
Or they'll put the USC up again and get it off us that way.
There's nothing I can do about that, but I'll never pay another water bill

jimgoose

wokingvoter wrote: »

I supported the water charges. I want clean water for my daughter, her children, her grandchildren. I thought €5 per house per week was very fair.
I'm fully paid up but now I swear on my child's life I will never ever pay another penny for water.
They will either come back next year and say that I have to pay because I'm enough of a mug to go to work, but the girl next door, with 2 kids on OPFP, who has just pushed her buggy past my window nursing her iPhone 6 under her chin while she lights another fag, doesn't have to.
Or they'll put the USC up again and get it off us that way.
There's nothing I can do about that, but I'll never pay another water bill

This man. Not. A. Fucking. Ha'penny.

rafatoni

Deleted User wrote: »

We still have the company and we still have the charge. I would be careful about telling people to not pay, as it may have repercussions down the road.

IW has done great work since it was set up, despite this fact not suiting some.

Oh you are alive.... thought you had gone missing when i saw you were MIA on the other water thread about it being scrapped.

I was going to ring interpol

Ush1

jimgoose wrote: »

The fact that since the general election the majority of elected TDs are so on a platform of rejecting the water setup in it's current form, thus forcing Mad O'Duffy and his jackbooted know-it-all pals to back the fuck off if they want to see Leinster House again in the next five years. Somebody always pays one way or another - tell me about it, it's usually me and those like me. But, loud and clear, not like this.

The elected FF TDs? Who got us in this whole mess in the first place. I'm not sure what to say really, people get the government they deserve.

jimgoose

Ush1 wrote: »

The elected FF TDs? Who got us in this whole mess in the first place. I'm not sure what to say really, people get the government they deserve.

As you wish. But the dream of the ordered, "respectable" super-state built on forced labour and crippling taxes took a blow this week, from which I fervently hope it will never recover. May the road rise. :cool:

Alf Stewart.

Anyone like myself that might have put a few bob aside "just incase" ref water charges, and the possibility of them getting it off of me legally, can now put it to better use it seems.

Householders who did not pay water charges are unlikely to be pursued, while those that did stump up the money are set to be denied a refund.

Existing legislation says arrears must be above €500 before a person can be taken to court, meaning non-payers are likely to escape sanction.

Long weekend ahead...... That beer and barbecue ain't gonna pay for itself.

Satriale

rafatoni wrote: »

Oh you are alive.... thought you had gone missing when i saw you were MIA on the other water thread about it being scrapped.

I was going to ring interpol

Mary was at the watch repair shop, Tick-Tock .;)

Jack Killian

OfflerCrocGod wrote: »

The middle class will now subsidize people who waste water through reduced after tax income. The only way for you to pay less for water and sewage treatment is to earn less, the cost bears no relation to your usage. How anyone can claim that situation is rational or "fair" is beyond me.

And yet this was the case with IW anyway, despite the false claims that it was "pay for what you use".

Satriale

There'll be a few threats to try and scoop up the low hanging fruit, but there wont be any pursuits, FF wont want civil disobedience, the way FG seemed to court it.

I hope they are keeping the company name, that will help keep this mess firmly in peoples minds for the next cunning stunt they pull.

Broken Hearted Road

No way should anyone be getting refunds. Did people pay their water bills on condition the money was a loan if the charges were scrapped due to the opposition of the charges.