Water charges for excessive usage

Brendan Bendar · 13-01-2020 3:39pm

Please explain your rational for that rather vague statement.

Plumbthedepths · 13-01-2020 3:55pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Please explain your rational for that rather vague statement.

I assume you were addressing me, if you cannot see the nonsense in the last several posts it would be folly on my part to attempt to highlight it for you.
As I said the thread has descended into nonsense.

Brendan Bendar · 13-01-2020 4:14pm

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I assume you were addressing me, if you cannot see the nonsense in the last several posts it would be folly on my part to attempt to highlight it for you.
As I said the thread has descended in nonsense.

I don’t see any “nonsense” in the content.

I see fair comment on issues which are pretty common and of interest to the normal taxpayer.

Like a lot of ‘car wash outfits’ have mushroomed recently.

Who monitors them, who keeps tabs on that ‘industry’ who enforces compliance with water usage.

I would respectfully suggest that this is a valid concern to have as a hard pressed taxpayer.

James Brown · 13-01-2020 4:15pm

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I assume you were addressing me, if you cannot see the nonsense in the last several posts it would be folly on my part to attempt to highlight it for you.
As I said the thread has descended into nonsense.

Just playing to their strengths

Plumbthedepths · 13-01-2020 4:16pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

I don’t see any “nonsense” in the content.

I see fair comment on issues which are pretty common and of interest to the normal taxpayer.

Like a lot of ‘car wash outfits’ have mushroomed recently.

Who monitors them, who keeps tabs on that ‘industry’ who enforces compliance with water usage.

I would respectfully suggest that this is a valid concern to have as a hard pressed taxpayer.

Thank you for validating my comment.

Brendan Bendar · 13-01-2020 4:29pm

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Thank you for validating my comment.

The only thing I “validated” is you have no interest in the big picture regarding the management of potable water, other than to use the issue to further another agenda, it would appear.

Plumbthedepths · 13-01-2020 4:42pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

The only thing I “validated” is you have no interest in the big picture regarding the management of potable water, other than to use the issue to further another agenda, it would appear.

Doubling down on the nonsense I see.

Brendan Bendar · 13-01-2020 4:44pm

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Doubling down on the nonsense I see.

Now reading your last few ‘posts’ your criticism could be correct.

Plumbthedepths · 13-01-2020 4:45pm

Brendan Bendar wrote: »

Now reading your last few ‘posts’ your criticism could be correct.

You need to try harder B, school yard response.

Brendan Bendar · 13-01-2020 4:58pm

Ok.. let’s leave it at that, before the mods get interested.

Benedict · 14-01-2020 10:13am

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

You need to try harder B, school yard response.

With respect, you were invited to give a concrete example of the "nonsense" you refer to and you have failed to do so.

blanch152 · 14-01-2020 12:41pm

charlie14 wrote: »

I did`nt hear that particular programme, but from past IW mouthpieces it would not overly surprise me.
If in fact that is what she said, it wasn`ty just her maths that didn`t add up.

If IW attempted to charge all households in a housing estate for water lost via a leak they would not have legally a leg to stand on. Most likely end up in court being sued themselves.

I don't know about that. The court would likely recognise the fact of excessive usage and the requirement on Irish Water under legislation to seek recoupment. The likely outcome of any court case in my opinion would be that a judge would strike out the proceedings about previous waste subject to the installation of water meters at every house to monitor future wastage.

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

The comments on this thread have descended into nonsense

While Charlie's comment was light-hearted and I would challenge the logic of his legal views, I wouldn't call it nonsense. Didn't really see any examples of nonsense to be honest.

charlie14 · 14-01-2020 2:02pm

blanch152 wrote: »

I don't know about that. The court would likely recognise the fact of excessive usage and the requirement on Irish Water under legislation to seek recoupment. The likely outcome of any court case in my opinion would be that a judge would strike out the proceedings about previous waste subject to the installation of water meters at every house to monitor future wastage.

While Charlie's comment was light-hearted and I would challenge the logic of his legal views, I wouldn't call it nonsense. Didn't really see any examples of nonsense to be honest.

You may have misinterpreted Plumbthedepths posts.

They were not an invitation to add further nonsense as you appear to believe.

Irish Water rolling up in front of a judge as defendants because they had charged every household in an estate equally due to them not having a clue where mains water went, is only going to have one outcome.

Another ass kicking for Irish Water.

Benedict · 14-01-2020 2:59pm

Blanch may be forgetting that IW don't do installations any more. This fact is quite important if you think about it!

charlie14 · 14-01-2020 3:49pm

Benedict wrote: »

Blanch may be forgetting that IW don't do installations any more. This fact is quite important if you think about it!

Conveniently forgetting that they are not allowed to make it up as they go along with charges for water when they have no idea where it is going.

It`s just more of his nonsense.

14-01-2020 5:08pm

charlie14 wrote: »

You may have misinterpreted Plumbthedepths posts.

They were not an invitation to add further nonsense as you appear to believe.

Irish Water rolling up in front of a judge as defendants because they had charged every household in an estate equally due to them not having a clue where mains water went, is only going to have one outcome.

Another ass kicking for Irish Water.

Nonsense.

charlie14 · 14-01-2020 6:11pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Nonsense.

You care to explain why you believe that to be so ?

14-01-2020 6:16pm

charlie14 wrote: »

You care to explain why you believe that to be so ?

This. “ Irish Water rolling up in front of a judge as defendants because they had charged every household in an estate equally due to them not having a clue where mains water went, is only going to have one outcome”

charlie14 · 14-01-2020 6:18pm

Deleted User wrote: »

This. “ Irish Water rolling up in front of a judge as defendants because they had charged every household in an estate equally due to them not having a clue where mains water went, is only going to have one outcome”

Your point being ?

14-01-2020 6:20pm

charlie14 wrote: »

Your point being ?

That what was posted was nonsense.

charlie14 · 14-01-2020 6:29pm

Deleted User wrote: »

That what was posted was nonsense.

If you are referring to what Blanch posted of the outcome if IW ended up in front of a judge defending billing every household in an estate because they did not know where mains water was being lost, I totally agree.

Total nonsense.

14-01-2020 6:49pm

charlie14 wrote: »

If you are referring to what Blanch posted of the outcome if IW ended up in front of a judge defending billing every household in an estate because they did not know where mains water was being lost, I totally agree.

Total nonsense.

I do believe that it was your post I was responding to.

charlie14 · 14-01-2020 7:03pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I do believe that it was your post I was responding to.

Therefore you agree with Blanch.

Just goes to show Plumbthedepths was only partly correct.

This thread has gone beyond even nonsense.

Plumbthedepths · 14-01-2020 7:05pm

charlie14 wrote: »

Therefore you agree with Blanch.

Just goes to show Plumbthedepths was only partly correct.

This thread has gone beyond even nonsense.

It was gone off the rails when you started having nonsense about competent plumbers being spouted and shining lights under rocks. Nonsense, the mods should look at closing this or moving it into AH because it's become a joke.

blanch152 · 14-01-2020 7:07pm

charlie14 wrote: »

You may have misinterpreted Plumbthedepths posts.

They were not an invitation to add further nonsense as you appear to believe.

Irish Water rolling up in front of a judge as defendants because they had charged every household in an estate equally due to them not having a clue where mains water went, is only going to have one outcome.

Another ass kicking for Irish Water.

Benedict wrote: »

Blanch may be forgetting that IW don't do installations any more. This fact is quite important if you think about it!

They may not do them, but the legal power to install meters does still exist, which is something a judge would take into account in such a case, hence my view of the likely outcome.

To argue for a definitive outcome such as charlie suggests would require a depth of knowledge of circumstances, legislation and precedence that few on these boards would have with the possible exception of some in the legal forum.

charlie14 · 14-01-2020 7:28pm

blanch152 wrote: »

They may not do them, but the legal power to install meters does still exist, which is something a judge would take into account in such a case, hence my view of the likely outcome.

To argue for a definitive outcome such as charlie suggests would require a depth of knowledge of circumstances, legislation and precedence that few on these boards would have with the possible exception of some in the legal forum.

There would be no need for a definitive arguement.
IW billing every household in an estate for mains water because IW had not a clue as to where it went, would have them laughed out of court.

Brendan Bendar · 14-01-2020 7:57pm

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

It was gone off the rails when you started having nonsense about competent plumbers being spouted and shining lights under rocks. Nonsense, the mods should look at closing this or moving it into AH because it's become a joke.

The Mods will decide if it has become a joke or not.

Benedict · 15-01-2020 2:52pm

A joke? Well if you go to the IW site - or the Citizens' Info site - today Wed 15 Jan 20 you'll be told that people without meters who are suspected of excessive usage will be nailed and offered a meter and if they refuse, they'll be hammered for E500 (per annum).

So are they joking?

Maybe they are!

But it doesn't sound like it!

Brendan Bendar · 15-01-2020 4:53pm

Benedict wrote: »

A joke? Well if you go to the IW site - or the Citizens' Info site - today Wed 15 Jan 20 you'll be told that people without meters who are suspected of excessive usage will be nailed and offered a meter and if they refuse, they'll be hammered for E500 (per annum).

So are they joking?

Maybe they are!

But it doesn't sound like it!

Benny, I’ll put it to you this way, the Brenner is not panicking.

Benedict · 16-01-2020 11:36am

But is it not strange that IW are not making any attempt to show exactly how they will be able to nail the non-metered homes if they breach the quota? They must be aware that nobody believes they can do it - the mysterious "plumber" thinks he knows the answer but we're not going to be let in on his secret apparently.

I notice that when politicians are asked about their plans for the water-charges if they win the election, the shutters go down straight away.

Water charges for excessive usage

Comments