Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Paul Murphy arrested

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Viigand View Post
    Can I also get my VRT back on my car as I've paid tax on it twice?
    No because you already have paid the tax twice. Your mistake which with IW I'm avoiding.
    Excellence is hard to keep quite - Sherrie Coale

    Comment


      Originally posted by McCloud View Post
      No it's not as you agree we are already paying for the water why pay twice?
      Because if you pay by metered consumption, you pay once, for the amount you use, which incentivises conservation and punishes waste. Precisely the aim of the Water Framework Directive, precisely what the old regime did nothing to stop and precisely why the Taxation Commission said in 2009 we would have to move to charging for water to comply with the Directive.
      Ceterum censeo INM irrumandum esse.

      Comment


        Originally posted by McCloud View Post
        No because you already have paid the tax twice. Your mistake which with IW I'm avoiding.
        No. He's complied with the law. You are also under a legal obligation, which you are breaking.
        Ceterum censeo INM irrumandum esse.

        Comment


          Originally posted by Viigand View Post
          Can I have my PRSI back as well please as I'm paying twice for health insurance, dental and optical care and pretty much everything else it allegedly covers.
          Talk to Enda I'm sure he will listen to your complaints.
          Excellence is hard to keep quite - Sherrie Coale

          Comment


            Originally posted by Thomond78 View Post
            No. He's complied with the law. You are also under a legal obligation, which you are breaking.
            No legal obligation thanks as I have not entered into a legal contract with IW for the supply of my water as I already pay for it through government charges.
            Excellence is hard to keep quite - Sherrie Coale

            Comment


              Originally posted by McCloud View Post

              Well my employer pays for my private health insurance so I'd be quite stupid cancelling it.
              So you've got more "ethics" than your employer has! Have you told him yet?
              New infraction avoidance policy: a post may be described as imbecilic, but its author should never be described as an imbecile.

              Comment


                Originally posted by Thomond78 View Post
                Because if you pay by metered consumption, you pay once, for the amount you use, which incentivises conservation and punishes waste. Precisely the aim of the Water Framework Directive, precisely what the old regime did nothing to stop and precisely why the Taxation Commission said in 2009 we would have to move to charging for water to comply with the Directive.
                Oh that must be the reason why the government is giving everyone regardless if they are on a private scheme or public scheme a "water conserving grant". Again we are already charged for water through additional charges on VAT and motor tax. So maybe the taxation commission should consider that before they make rubbish pronouncements.
                Excellence is hard to keep quite - Sherrie Coale

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Old Dog View Post
                  So you've got more "ethics" than your employer has! Have you told him yet?
                  I suspect he doesn't care.
                  Excellence is hard to keep quite - Sherrie Coale

                  Comment


                    Originally posted by McCloud View Post
                    No legal obligation thanks as I have not entered into a legal contract with IW for the supply of my water as I already pay for it through government charges.
                    Utter, total, irredeemable Freeman bollócks, McCloud. That "no contract in a statute" ****e won't fly anywhere. On which, may I present the all-time definitive smack-down, the glorious Meads v. Meads. http://www.canlii.org/en/ab/abqb/doc...12abqb571.html
                    Last edited by Thomond78; 15-August-2015, 21:11.
                    Ceterum censeo INM irrumandum esse.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by McCloud View Post
                      I suspect he doesn't care.
                      I still think that you should tell him. He might promote you.
                      New infraction avoidance policy: a post may be described as imbecilic, but its author should never be described as an imbecile.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Thomond78 View Post
                        Utter, total, irredeemable Freeman bollócks, McCloud. That "no contract in a statute" ****e won't fly anywhere. On which, may I present the all-time definitive smack-down, the glorious Meads v. Meads.
                        Thomond78 I'm a middle aged man who has never ever been involved in the law for any reason. But you know what I'll go to jail before paying this additional charge for the same service because I have had enough. To much taken and nothing provided.
                        Excellence is hard to keep quite - Sherrie Coale

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by Old Dog View Post
                          I still think that you should tell him. He might promote you.
                          Nope sadly my boss was found not to be required any more so he was let go. Currently I don't have a boss.
                          Excellence is hard to keep quite - Sherrie Coale

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by McCloud View Post
                            Oh that must be the reason why the government is giving everyone regardless if they are on a private scheme or public scheme a "water conserving grant". Again we are already charged for water through additional charges on VAT and motor tax. So maybe the taxation commission should consider that before they make rubbish pronouncements.
                            You've never read either that report or the Water Framework Directive, have you?
                            Ceterum censeo INM irrumandum esse.

                            Comment


                              Originally posted by McCloud View Post
                              Thomond78 I'm a middle aged man who has never ever been involved in the law for any reason. But you know what I'll go to jail before paying this additional charge for the same service because I have had enough. To much taken and nothing provided.
                              You won't go to jail. It'll simply be deducted.

                              Which change btw - fines garnisheed - is long overdue, and one we've all wanted long before this, because jailing for fines is a waste.
                              Ceterum censeo INM irrumandum esse.

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Thomond78 View Post
                                You won't go to jail. It'll simply be deducted.

                                Which change btw - fines garnisheed - is long overdue, and one we've all wanted long before this, because jailing for fines is a waste.
                                Lets see them try to deduct it they will need to go to court to get that. Sure the court system will be clogged you'll be out of a job. I wonder how many of the 46% who allegedly paid the additional water charge are thinking I'll not be doing that again.
                                Excellence is hard to keep quite - Sherrie Coale

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X