Jump to content

More uselessness from DBC


Newsdesk

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Cinderella said:

Did you read John’s response? Or you just think you know better, regardless …

(Head hitting desk) 

Did you miss the bits where I said “I’m not disagreeing with you” and “You have set out your moderation approach very clearly which I’d agree with” in your rush to pile in? 

Edited by Steady Eddie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Steady Eddie said:

Did you miss the bits where I said “I’m not disagreeing with you” and “You have set out your moderation approach very clearly which I’d agree with” I. Your rush to pile in? 

Read back your entire reply. You say you agree, then you re-prosecute why you think you were right in the first place.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, NoTailT said:

A bit like reposting the Michelle Mone stuff in my view. Nobody causing grief about that.

But I'm heeding the warning and conscious not to be a critic of DBC.

Oh they seem to have fingers everywhere.  Posting fake news all over manx news feeds , it's clear this forum has Frank dictating what is allowed or not allowed.  Still hasn't answered the question on how much money Santon makes publicly either.  It's fine though lots of ways to find that out through other channels even though I know its losing money for us . I promised more to come yet , much better even than the remarks by the guy on twitter . 

So that's the guys alleged misdemeanours on housing , Santon weekly pick ups costing ratepayers , not recycling anywhere near what they claim , getting rid of public bins.  Think it's not far off a call of no confidence by a minority . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Manxieover65 said:

Oh they seem to have fingers everywhere.  Posting fake news all over manx news feeds , it's clear this forum has Frank dictating what is allowed or not allowed.  Still hasn't answered the question on how much money Santon makes publicly either.  It's fine though lots of ways to find that out through other channels even though I know its losing money for us . I promised more to come yet , much better even than the remarks by the guy on twitter . 

So that's the guys alleged misdemeanours on housing , Santon weekly pick ups costing ratepayers , not recycling anywhere near what they claim , getting rid of public bins.  Think it's not far off a call of no confidence by a minority . 

To be fair to Frank I haven't seen him post, comment or act on anything in this thread. I think he's learnt to distance himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frank has not been involved, no.

This issue has been resolved after reports and other information received.

Moderators are responsible for protecting the forum, AND, god only knows why, some of our 'lesser legal geniuses' that think they can say what they like on here and that there will be no consequences - sometimes to their own personal and financial detriment.

Now...please, let's get back to the debate.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Albert Tatlock said:

Frank has not been involved, no.

This issue has been resolved after reports and other information received.

Moderators are responsible for protecting the forum, AND, god only knows why, some of our 'lesser legal geniuses' that think they can say what they like on here and that there will be no consequences - sometimes to their own personal and financial detriment.

Now...please, let's get back to the debate.

 

Just out of interest AT, can you clarify the bold point? I note a considerable number of posts have now disappeared.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Declan said:

But you can't shop around like you can with boiler service companies and pay your rates to a different council. It isn't a contract between you and the Council, it's a tax. 

If they'd made the change before the bills went out, the service would be the same, the bills the same, and everyone would have had no choice but to pay it. Also if they changed the service before the bills went out then the previous year would have been impacted by the same "unfairness". 

It may well be a "tax"...but part of it is levied on the basis of the provision of services, one of which is the weekly collection of refuse. If DBC take it upon themselves to halve that number of collections whilst still levying the same charges, it may be open to challenge by somebody with the clout and the means. If they win there will be more egg on DBC faces and the potential for rebates to be issued.

If this change had been kept above board it would have been announced before the beginning of the financial year in April and Rates Demands then calculated accordingly before issue.

As it is, it now looks like an underhand little earner for DBC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Cinderella said:

Are rates really a tax? Or are they a service charge? If the latter, then more easy to make the argument that services paid for are not being rendered. 
 

if a tax, then we all know they only go up, or deliver less …

I still think if the saving being touted here is circa £30k, that there's far more flamboyant things that DBC could trim for the sake of 30k. What's that, a couple of quid per rates payer? Hardly worth spitting feathers over really. Let's not forget that commercial ratepayers have to pay separately for their refuse collection.

Edited by NoTailT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, NoTailT said:

I still think if the saving being touted here is circa £30k, that there's far more flamboyant things that DBC could trim for the sake of 30k. What's that, a couple of quid per rates payer? Hardly worth spitting feathers over really.

£25k savings were towted by some of 'the protesters' but the DBC line was that it was actually a 'cost neutral' change. I don't believe it though and would like to see the breakdown.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Albert Tatlock said:

£25k savings were towted by some of 'the protesters' but the DBC line was that it was actually a 'cost neutral' change. I don't believe it though and would like to see the breakdown.

How does a change like that become cost neutral? If it's neutral, why change?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...