Firefighters watch home burn to ground... - Page 4

Xanthos · 10-07-2010, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallboy

He's got an even bigger problem. The fire started in two compost barrels outside the house. He may not see a nickel in insurance money from this.

- X

billw501 · 10-07-2010, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigRigMike

You collect the fee the same way that every other business does it. You sue to put a lein on the property. There are many businesses that render services before being paid in full.

I am looking at the overall cost. It is cheaper for the firefighters to put out the fire and save the house. Now insurance is going to pay for a new house and collect the money from their customers. So everyone as a whole is out more money than if they put out the fire.

I agree. I would much rather deal with the cost of having the fire department charge me after saving my house than recovering from my house burning down completely.

Hemlawk · 10-07-2010, 02:02 PM

Yes, people should be responsible. But I don't agree with the firefighters lack of actions. It's money vs morals...

PQ · 10-07-2010, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tallboy

OK, let's say they put the fire out and went home. You're a homeowner down the street...you gonna pay your $75 next year? No way in hell. Now, let's say you didn't pay and your house catches fire, and they don't come/help.

Exactly how long will it take 'till you're on the phone with an attorney?

This, boys and girls, is a small window into what is wrong with this great country of ours. RIP personal responsibility, we hardly knew ye...

It's a good point. They would then have to put EVERY fire out payed or not.

And the people KNOW this.

If you try to charge them afterward, you then only make the money you need WHILE fighting fires. Then you better hope there are fires. Better not do anything to cause fire awareness. Then you east into your funds. Kind of a conflict of interests.

Charging afterward opens up a whole new can of worms.

Xanthos · 10-07-2010, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UT-Enginner

This is

.... so if the local police were ran the same way as this FD, someone in this town could get robbed and the police woulnt respond to it if they didnt pay a annual fee for their services/protection.

Regardless of the fee, the FD should have helped out and worked out a deal with the family after the fire situation was taken care of. (even if it meant charging the family out the @$$) What if there was ppl trapped inside, would the FD help out then. this just seems totally stupid.

But this is NOT his local fire department. This is the department for a completely different town. He doesn't have a local fire department, so his local government worked out a deal with the other city's government to get fire service for their citizens at a cost. He didn't pay it.
- X

billw501 · 10-07-2010, 02:08 PM

From what I gather from this story - this fire department exists because of the city, not the county. It's an option to county residents. Would the fire department cease to exist because no county residents take them up on the offer? I'm definately not an expert, but that doesn't make sense to me.

PQ · 10-07-2010, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by UT-Enginner

This is

.... so if the local police were ran the same way as this FD, someone in this town could get robbed and the police woulnt respond to it if they didnt pay a annual fee for their services/protection.

Regardless of the fee, the FD should have helped out and worked out a deal with the family after the fire situation was taken care of. (even if it meant charging the family out the @$$) What if there was ppl trapped inside, would the FD help out then. this just seems totally stupid.

Are you familiar with the Tennessee State Constitution?

I"m not. So I make no assumptions about a police force on a local county level.

Fire protection is different.

And YES, if you live out in the styx, you may be sol if you are robbed. The county will get involed. But that's foul play. It's just different.

The Gov. (again, I don't know Tennessee Const.) usually has a responsibility to protect you from bad people, but you have to protect YOURSELF from YOURSELF.

Based on the information we have, I understand the decision made by the authorities.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hemlawk

Yes, people should be responsible. But I don't agree with the firefighters lack of actions. It's money vs morals...

The firefighters were following orders.

Even the family doens't blame the firefighters.

Xanthos · 10-07-2010, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billw501

From what I gather from this story - this fire department exists because of the city, not the county. It's an option to county residents. Would the fire department cease to exist because no county residents take them up on the offer? I'm definately not an expert, but that doesn't make sense to me.

No, it wouldn't. Most of its revenue comes from city taxes, which county residents don't pay (which is why a lot of people like living in county, at least out here). The extra fee would be going to pay for another truck to be on duty at any given time, so that they don't lose the ability to service the city while they're out in county.
- X

Dr Jkel · 10-07-2010, 02:13 PM

This reminds me alot of trying to teach kids to do the right thing. Learn in school, do your homework, brush your teeth etc..... because if you don't this could happen. Unfortunately for these people they learned the hard way.

I personally believe I could not just stand there and do nothing

billw501 · 10-07-2010, 02:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xanthos

No, it wouldn't. Most of its revenue comes from city taxes, which county residents don't pay (which is why a lot of people like living in county, at least out here). The extra fee would be going to pay for another truck to be on duty at any given time, so that they don't lose the ability to service the city while they're out in county.
- X

Then I don't see the problem with a per service option.

PQ · 10-07-2010, 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xanthos

But this is NOT his local fire department. This is the department for a completely different town. He doesn't have a local fire department, so his local government worked out a deal with the other city's government to get fire service for their citizens at a cost. He didn't pay it.
- X

Quote:

Originally Posted by billw501

From what I gather from this story - this fire department exists because of the city, not the county. It's an option to county residents. Would the fire department cease to exist because no county residents take them up on the offer? I'm definately not an expert, but that doesn't make sense to me.

Correct. It's an option to county residents.

The fire department would still exist without the county.

So what doesn't make sense?

The city should be FORCED to cater to the county?

CamaroSkooter · 10-07-2010, 02:18 PM

People don't think in long-term consequences anymore. They only care about the short-term.

If you live within a city's jurisdiction, then you pay taxes to that city (and fire protection is included in that). However, if you do not live within the jurisdiction of any major city (as is the case here) then where you get fire protection from is up to you as a home owner.

If a city tells some outlying neighborhoods that they will provide fire protection services to them for a small fee, then it is up to those home owners to decide if they want that service or not. The city doesn't have to offer these service, but they do as a courtesy. You don't have to pay it. And that's what this guy decided. In his infinite wisdom, he liked his odds that he would never have a house fire. But then it happens and he's trying to throw blame around when it lies solely on his shoulders.

If he wanted fire protection he could have had it for a measly $75. He didn't buy in, so he doesn't get any. End of argument. He doesn't have a legal leg to stand on for all those people saying they would sue.

America has gotten sue happy and it needs to stop. Unless a doctor was drunk and lopped off the wrong limb, quit bitching and handle business on your end.

He was offered a service, he refused it, and now he gets to live with the results. Tough.

billw501 · 10-07-2010, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PQ

Correct. It's an option to county residents.

The fire department would still exist without the county.

So what doesn't make sense?

The city should be FORCED to cater to the county?

I wouldn't call a "per service" fee catering to the county. Just an option like Tessa mentioned earlier. Pay $75 earlier or take your chances and pay a lot more later. I like options.

Xanthos · 10-07-2010, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by billw501

Then I don't see the problem with a per service option.

There's a problem with that though.

Revenue from city taxes is pretty easy to predict. So the fire department knows they'll be getting X dollars. Since fire departments are non-profit, they use all of that money for personnel, equipment, training, etc.

Now lets say it costs Y dollars to buy, maintain, and staff a truck to run calls for county. In year one, they run enough calls to make Y dollars back. But in year two they don't. They just lost money, and its not just cutting into profit margins. Say the same thing happens in year two or year three, it becomes very possible that the fire department WOULD cease to exist.

The only way to make it work on a long-term basis would be to charge in advance.
- X

10-07-2010, 02:02 PM	#45
Hemlawk AwesomeBillDawesonville Drives: CGM 2SS/RS =) Join Date: May 2009 Location: Jersey Shore Posts: 2,067	Yes, people should be responsible. But I don't agree with the firefighters lack of actions. It's money vs morals... __________________ Order placed on 1/13/11 - Purchased 2/22/11 2SS/RS CGM

10-07-2010, 02:13 PM	#51
Dr Jkel Roll Tide Drives: 2010 2SS RJT/BLK 6Spd Man Join Date: May 2009 Location: Talladega, Alabama Posts: 4,378	This reminds me alot of trying to teach kids to do the right thing. Learn in school, do your homework, brush your teeth etc..... because if you don't this could happen. Unfortunately for these people they learned the hard way. I personally believe I could not just stand there and do nothing __________________ MUSTANG...Like Bringing a Hot Dog to a Steak Dinner....There is no comparison.

10-07-2010, 02:18 PM	#54
CamaroSkooter Retarded One-Legged Owl Drives: 2010 Black Camaro 2SS Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 9,745	People don't think in long-term consequences anymore. They only care about the short-term. If you live within a city's jurisdiction, then you pay taxes to that city (and fire protection is included in that). However, if you do not live within the jurisdiction of any major city (as is the case here) then where you get fire protection from is up to you as a home owner. If a city tells some outlying neighborhoods that they will provide fire protection services to them for a small fee, then it is up to those home owners to decide if they want that service or not. The city doesn't have to offer these service, but they do as a courtesy. You don't have to pay it. And that's what this guy decided. In his infinite wisdom, he liked his odds that he would never have a house fire. But then it happens and he's trying to throw blame around when it lies solely on his shoulders. If he wanted fire protection he could have had it for a measly $75. He didn't buy in, so he doesn't get any. End of argument. He doesn't have a legal leg to stand on for all those people saying they would sue. America has gotten sue happy and it needs to stop. Unless a doctor was drunk and lopped off the wrong limb, quit bitching and handle business on your end. He was offered a service, he refused it, and now he gets to live with the results. Tough. __________________ My VIN = 2G1FK1EJ9A9105017 Build Date: 04-23-2009 according to: http://www.compnine.com/vid.php

10-07-2010, 02:08 PM	#48
billw501 Drives: 2010 IBM 2SS/RS Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Evans, GA Posts: 244	From what I gather from this story - this fire department exists because of the city, not the county. It's an option to county residents. Would the fire department cease to exist because no county residents take them up on the offer? I'm definately not an expert, but that doesn't make sense to me.