Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Angry at changes to waste service
I got my leaflet today stating that from October you have to pay £75 a year for garden waste collection. Further bulk collections will cost £25 for 4 items then £10 per item. If the dustman break your wheelie bin or you don't have one you have to pay £30.
I rang Haringey who transferred me to veola. Veola say it's Haringey council who decided they need to save 20 million for social care.
I am disgusted. I have lived in this borough for 53 years and all this is going to do is make people dump rubbish in the streets in a borough that has the worst fly tipping in England.
As far as saving money for social care, already the council tax bill went up to cover this. Haringey council should stop wasting money on other things.
I for one will not pay £75 and I suggest Haringey think again..
Tags for Forum Posts: garden waste, waste collection charges
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Nick Eftychiou on
-
Well mine Is £1900 so I'd be happy to pay what you pay even if it meant walking a distance to take my rubbish. Estates are subsidised including your water so I don't think you have anything to complain about. If they put special bins at the end of street or have an area for bulky items in walking distance like you do I'd be more than happy
-
Permalink Reply by Jacq on
-
Just wanted to clarify, before you perpetuate these myths, that Sarah is right. You don't subsidise estates and in particular, you don't subsidise water on estates. Also, i think you are confusing your council tax (which may be higher as you seem fortunate enough to be able to own an entire house) with the council tax AND service charge sarah has to pay on her estate, the combined total of which will be more than your council tax alone. Having been an estate resident myself, I can confirm that you often have to pay twice for things like street lighting and extra for services like (until now) bulk waste collections that were provided free to non-estate residents. I resent your undertone that people on estates are feeding off the rest of society. Given recent events, I wish there was more subsidy that went into estates to provide good quality, safe provision of housing and services to less well off communities. I care less about those fortunate enough to have gardens having to pay to deal with their grass cuttings.
-
Permalink Reply by Michael Anderson on
-
Jacq, there two kinds of things are being mixed up in a few posts here. Council tax pays for, amongst other things, universal services like waste removal, street sweeping, street lighting and so on. Generally, the larger the property, the higher the amount of council tax, so larger properties (often with gardens) pay more. Service charges are for services specific to a property or group of properties like maintenance of common areas, estate and communal area lighting etc.
You are right that social housing is not subsidised by council tax. That's illegal as housing spend is specifically ring fenced as such.
-
-
Hi. I know but I'm not mixed up. Service charge on estates pays for the street lighting, street sweeping, bulk waste removal etc on estates themselves as it's privately managed land. Clearance of fly tipping on estates is paid for through service charge too. Estate residents then also pay council tax which contributes towards all these things mentioned across the borough. So it's a double charge. I know this as I went through my service charge bill line by line and got billed extra for things like replacement street lighting. Then I paid the same council tax liability as non-estate residents to cover the maintenance and provision of everything I've mentioned previously. Estates residents actually subsidise the rest of the borough for some things.
-
-
"You don't subsidise estates [....]"Really? Then where does the difference in market value rent and the £90 or so a week rent estate tenants pay comes from?
"I resent your undertone that people on estates are feeding off the rest of society."
I won't keep it an undertone; I'll make it an overtone. I can give anecdotes and I am sure most all of us can about the abuses of the system--the layabouts we know that this system has created, etc. But it is articulated best in my experience by Bertrand Russell in "The Superior Virtue of the Oppressed."
The transgression that frosts me the most though is the illegal subletting at market rate that these people who supposedly aren't feeding off of the rest of society receive (not sure how it could be characterised other than "feeding off of the rest of society"). I know that there are counter-anecdotes of estate residents who are "worthy". It's not the point. The point is statist government intervention destroys the human spirit, destroys the nuclear family and does little to better society and housing estates do much to demonstrate this. There is a lot more to be said about this subject, particularly when juxtaposed with immigration policy.
Sorry to have gone off topic but I couldn't let this lie. Housing spend may be a different line item on a budget spread sheet Michael, but the source of that line item comes from tax I pay, and in my view the 1900 annual cheque to the council or the 45% of what I make being the source of that spend is immaterial.
-
-
We are never going to agree. Your attitude saddens me. I'm going to leave you to your Daily Mail and not engage any further with this.
-
-
You're mixing up two things. Day to day spend on social housing comes from rents and service charges. It's called the Housing Revenue Account. The other element is housing subsidy which is allocated by government and comes from general taxation. At the moment an enormous amount of this is used to cover housing benefit (95%+ in some areas). As the great bulk of renting is in the private sector most of your tax goes into the pockets private landlords, not social housing tenants.
-
-
We've all got large woven white plastic sacks at the moment, which are emptied into a large wheelie bin by Veolia staff - when the bin is full it goes to the lorry and is emptied, usually once per 5-10 households.
That's a lot quicker than having each week in future to empty each household's garden waste new wheelie bin in turn, including time to lift the lid and check for contents (winter (unlikely) and summer) - currently, no sack on display, no stop.
I wish they'd simply issued new plastic sacks with council logo but in a different colour, to denote those who pay for the new service. Far less space-consuming compared to a third wheelie bin, since they fold when empty. A lot cheaper too. Haringey/Veolia's change to the current system isn't even optimal.
-
Permalink Reply by Alison P on
-
Totally agree, irrespective of your view on the charges, the decision to shift from bags to plastic bins that many people can't fit anywhere just makes no sense.
-
-
They are shifting to bins to try and justify you having to pay £75 a year and secondly it will mean another charge if it gets broke. Imagine if all three of your bins, brown black and green gets broke that's £90 to replace. They are clever. The answer is for everyone to refuse and start putting this waste in the black bin
-
Permalink Reply by michaela rourke on
-
I would be tempted to suck it up and pay the £75 if it didn't mean having yet another bin on my front path - it's just not practical. Nor is having to pay for a replacement bin after it's been thrown around the street by Veolia - how do they justify that? I'd like to charge them for the time I spend retrieving my bins from wherever they've left them each week. If they didn't supply new bins, surely they could reduce that £75 a bit.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
