Firefighters watch home burn to ground...

[el ess A]

Paying before services rendered is all this guy would have had to do. Heck, nearly everyone does it when buying gas for the car if paying cash, right? Why isn't that such a horrible crime? No cash, no gas. Pretty simple concept.

I don't pay my home or car insurance after the fact. I pay in to cover the RISK in the event I do have an insured problem. And if I CHOOSE not to pay it, then ~I~ assume all the risk of ensuring I have the means to put the fire out.

I feel no sorrow for the guy if he did indeed know about the $75 in advance. And the story layout seems to suggest that. Sucks to be him.

And this moral obligation stuff is bunk when it comes to protecting a structure that you haven't paid for protection. It's protocol. I'm sure they would have done something to at least save someone if they were trapped in the home. Not doing so over $75 would be a crime. But comparing it to ambulatory services where human life is a concern, that's a completely different level.

One lesson learned I can tell you, this putz will pay that $75 everytime in the future I imagine. And if you're in the same boat of having to pay for fire protection like this....learn from this guy's mistake. Is your home worth an extra $75 per year for fire department services?

[PQ]

Originally Posted by BigRigMike

How does this fee work if you live in a duplex or condo?

What bothers me about this story is that they have to show up to protect the house that paid the fee but there is no incremental cost to put out the fire. The firefighters were being paid if they put out the fire or if they stood there.

Originally Posted by Hemlawk

It's a good sameritain issue. You don't let someones $200k house burn down over $75.

They could easily charge the guy $5-$10k in expenses.

This is BULL S**T

And then it starts. Seriously..... what are the chances your house burns down? Pretty small. So you send a message that they show up anyway. Many people would take the gamble that they don't have to pay that cost. AND how exactly do you collect that cost. Espec. when they are having to repair damages thta resulted from the fire while burning...... Good luck with that. Put it on the 'Accounts recievable' books? You would effectively be privatizing your local Gov. Can't call it a tax. Call it a Fine? That would mean liability. And your right back to the proverbial fork in the road. Accountability, or not? So the black hole of losing independance strikes again.

Originally Posted by Tessa

Oh I get that - and I agree
I would not want to be forced to pay double to cover for some asshat that was too cheap to pay. I hate that my $$$ goes to jackasses NOW that don't want to work or be bothered to be accountable for thier crap.

So I get concept. But the soft center in me still thinks that poor guy was running around trying to save his sht while professionals just sat and watched.

Devil's advocate here - great they were there if the fire spread - but I mean, had the PUT IT OUT, it wouldn't have had the chance to spread or the chance of ruining someone else's property.
I mean, frankly, I'd be PISSED if I was the guy that paid, and my house caught on fire or had ANY damage b/c the fire dept was just waiting for my house to catch on fire -- PROACTIVE is better then REACTIVE.

But.....devils' advocate aside -- I agree that if the town rules enforce payment or else - and that guy didn't pay then...they were well within their rights to let his house burn.

It's NOT an easy decision. I'd probably have told my guys to put the fire out. But I will not critisize the decision made.'

[Dr Jkel]

The only real problem I have with this whole story is the Fact that they were there and did nothing. The cost of labor, cost of fuel, cost of everything else had already been spent by them showing up, what would have been the harm in putting out the fire and then charging, fining or whatever.

I am sure this place is like many rural towns throughout this country, poor, low on tax dollars, not alot of staff etc.....but to put out the brush fire and not the house, I'll use ESPN's phrase


C'Mon Man.

[BigRigMike]

Originally Posted by PQ

And then it starts. Seriously..... what are the chances your house burns down? Pretty small. So you send a message that they show up anyway. Many people would take the gamble that they don't have to pay that cost. AND how exactly do you collect that cost. Espec. when they are having to repair damages thta resulted from the fire while burning...... Good luck with that. Put it on the 'Accounts recievable' books? You would effectively be privatizing your local Gov. Can't call it a tax. Call it a Fine? That would mean liability. And your right back to the proverbial fork in the road. Accountability, or not? So the black hole of losing independance strikes again.

It's NOT an easy decision. I'd probably have told my guys to put the fire out. But I will not critisize the decision made.'

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.

[GrnMchin]

Being a FF all I can say is wow... If the Local FD collect funds through a fee and the home owner didn't pay for fire protection then so sad to bad.. Like insurance you may never need it, but in the off chance you do need it then you become a believer.. Now as for not responding and making a effort just doesn't sit well with me it makes the Pride, Honor and Ownership of the service we provide to our community's is turned and now make us look dishonorable and greedy even if they were right to do so. This is a trend w/ the down economy that all public service division are facing and they drew a line, but will be crucified for doing so. M2C

[PQ]

Originally Posted by ColdCamaroSS

Pretty sad story.

Can't imagine too many first responders not felling guilty about having let this house burn down. Further reading on the internet reveals some pets were lost. Thankfully, no humans were killed/harmed but the what ifs are incredible. A Child could have gone back in to the house, someone sleeping in the basement...

Owner claims he forgot the $75 fee...and would have paid anything at the time of the fire to save his home. The city should adopt not only their $75/year but $XXXX.XX for non-paying home owners if a fire breaks out.

Funny, the president of the National Firemen's Asscociation think this is hogwash. Basically said, do your job first, then figure out the monies afterwards. God save us.

Real humanity in this story...gotta pay to play.

The responders felt horrible. Reports had a few of the firefighters in tears. The decision was made over their heads.

And the president of the National Firemen's Asscociation doesn't count one little bit in this story. Absolutely ireleveant. Probably more of a politician than anything else. This is the LOCAL PEOPLEs government and system that they put in place themselves. Emergency personel are simpathetic on a face to face level. Conflict of interest imo.

I shouldn't be FORCED to sacrifice because someone else refuses.

Originally Posted by RubyCamaro

The guy who didn't pay actually lives in the next county, out of the jurisdiction of the fire dept. in question. The county of the guy with the fire, has no fire dept. The next county agreed to cover anyone willing to pay the $75 fee. A straightfoward business deal. If you want protection, then pay. Many rural areas in Tennessee have no fire dept. In the areas outside city limits in my county residents are covered by only volunteer fire depts. They are dependant for equiptment, liability insurance, operating expenses, etc. on the fees paid by those who want fire protection. Like others have said, personal responsibility. Granted this is not the ideal situation. But when I was growing up there were not even volunteer fire departments in rural areas, you were just on your own. If available, the nearest city fire Dept would show up just to prevent it from becoming a forest/wild fire & county governments paid for that. And YES, The firefighters hate, having to just watch property burn, but that is just the way it is.

[Xanthos]

Originally Posted by WYKOFF69Z

I hope he paid his home owners insurance.

Lets hope the insurance company doesn't find out that he lost all of his property because he refused to pay for fire service. I know my insurance rates are partially set based on my proximity to a fire station. That guy is, for all intents and purposes, an infinite distance from a fire station. I wonder if he told them that when he got the insurance.
- X

[Tessa]

Originally Posted by PQ

And then it starts. Seriously..... what are the chances your house burns down? Pretty small. So you send a message that they show up anyway. Many people would take the gamble that they don't have to pay that cost. AND how exactly do you collect that cost. Espec. when they are having to repair damages thta resulted from the fire while burning...... Good luck with that. Put it on the 'Accounts recievable' books? You would effectively be privatizing your local Gov. Can't call it a tax. Call it a Fine? That would mean liability. And your right back to the proverbial fork in the road. Accountability, or not? So the black hole of losing independance strikes again.

It's NOT an easy decision. I'd probably have told my guys to put the fire out. But I will not critisize the decision made.'

No and I agree. It's a tough thing to judge b/c there is the factual logical side (he did not pay, they did not provide the service, end of story) and the sad human side to it (his house was burning with his possesions and pets inside) that make it hard to judge what "right" is.
I'd be in teh same boat as this guy if I were in his place - I'd pay anything to save my house - and I WOULD pay and never put myself in that spot again. But there are plenty of people that would NOT pay and would mooch and would abuse the system b/c 98% of people are douchebags..... so....sometimes decent people who made a bad choice have to be the examples for the douche's. (He coulda been a douche, I'm just giving him the benefit of the doubt here).

[Tallboy]

Originally Posted by Dr Jkel

The only real problem I have with this whole story is the Fact that they were there and did nothing. The cost of labor, cost of fuel, cost of everything else had already been spent by them showing up, what would have been the harm in putting out the fire and then charging, fining or whatever.

I am sure this place is like many rural towns throughout this country, poor, low on tax dollars, not alot of staff etc.....but to put out the brush fire and not the house, I'll use ESPN's phrase


C'Mon Man.

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...

[el ess A]

All you have to do to see where the "it's ok if I don't pay upfront" method is going is to look at the hospital emergency rooms. They have to perform the service, paid or not. So how many people without insurance end up paying? Same road, different players.

Gotta draw the responsibility line somewhere. I know it sucks, but life is tough. It's tougher when you're stupid.

[Tallboy]

Originally Posted by Xanthos

Lets hope the insurance company doesn't find out that he lost all of his property because he refused to pay for fire service. I know my insurance rates are partially set based on my proximity to a fire station. That guy is, for all intents and purposes, an infinite distance from a fire station. I wonder if he told them that when he got the insurance.
- X

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.

[CamaroSkooter]

$75 is some pretty cheap insurance to make sure if anything ever does happen, you're at least not going to be facing a total loss.

Here's a question: Can you still get home owner's insurance if the insurance company knows you didn't pay the fee?

Cause that would suck.

It's obvious this guy has money and was just being a cheap-skate when he says he'll pay the firefighters anything to fight the fire.

If you never get burned, you'll never stop playing with fire (pun intended)

[PQ]

Originally Posted by Dr Jkel

The only real problem I have with this whole story is the Fact that they were there and did nothing. The cost of labor, cost of fuel, cost of everything else had already been spent by them showing up, what would have been the harm in putting out the fire and then charging, fining or whatever.

I am sure this place is like many rural towns throughout this country, poor, low on tax dollars, not alot of staff etc.....but to put out the brush fire and not the house, I'll use ESPN's phrase


C'Mon Man.

Oh, I feel much the same way. Like I said, I'd have gave the order to put the fire out.

But, again, I am weak at times. The guy who made the decision is tougher than me. I'd be doing wrong in my opinion by having my guys put it out. So I give cudos to them.

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.

Not if I own the insurance company. It was negligence. I wouldn't write a policy that allowed for a guy to not protect his home.


Again. The death of accountability. There is a pricipal that has to be maintained. With NO discipline, you have no compliance. And no one learns accountability.

That's all I'm saying.

Originally Posted by GrnMchin

Being a FF all I can say is wow... If the Local FD collect funds through a fee and the home owner didn't pay for fire protection then so sad to bad.. Like insurance you may never need it, but in the off chance you do need it then you become a believer.. Now as for not responding and making a effort just doesn't sit well with me it makes the Pride, Honor and Ownership of the service we provide to our community's look dishonorable and greedy even if they were right to do so. This is a trend w/ the down economy that all public service division are facing and they drew a line, but will be crucified for doing so. M2C

Yup.

[UT-Engineer]

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.