Firefighters Let Home Burn Over Unpaid Fee

I understand the compassion element that matty and hog1 are saying, .

Are you kidding me? How am I not on that list? I'm offended.

He does say he forgot, so my words about choosing were wrong, except if you use Sadens interpretation. However, in his interview with Keith Obermann he also said he knew of several other houses where the various fire departments had refused. So he did know that it could be a consequence. He also said that it had happened once before and a former official had waived the fee, but the new person had a policy not too. I forget things at work way too often, and I have missed bills and made other dumb moves. But in the end, you deal with the consequences. He also said he did have insurance and that they were covering up to the limits of what he paid for.

Just thinking about it further, could the insurance company deny his claim based on his failure to pay the fee?

Why is there a fee to begin with?

Seriously?

To me it comes down to this. It costs money to run a fire department. Putting out the fire in this case, to me, presents a pretty damn clear endangerment to the funding of the fire department. Blame a dumb policy that allows something like this to happen. Don't blame the fire-fighters and their bosses. They have to keep open for business for the greater good. Putting out fires for free works against that. It just does. At the end of the the day they chose not to do something that might end up costing them way more than just one fire. I can't fault them for that. Is it more decent to put the fire out and watch everyone else stop paying the fees and therefore have to curtail the service? Not to me it isn't. They had to choose between two crappy choices.

He does say he forgot, so my words about choosing were wrong, except if you use Sadens interpretation. However, in his interview with Keith Obermann he also said he knew of several other houses where the various fire departments had refused. So he did know that it could be a consequence. He also said that it had happened once before and a former official had waived the fee, but the new person had a policy not too. I forget things at work way too often, and I have missed bills and made other dumb moves. But in the end, you deal with the consequences. He also said he did have insurance and that they were covering up to the limits of what he paid for.

Just thinking about it further, could the insurance company deny his claim based on his failure to pay the fee?

Not unless it's spelled out in the policy somewhere

Seriously?

Yes seriously. How come the 30%-50% of my income that goes to the government isn't being used to pay for fire service in my area? How come that instead of trying to find out where I am the operator has to verify weather or not I paid a due, which for all I know could have been lost in the mail? Certain things need to be free market and others need to be socialism or whatever you want to call it. Fire service in and of itself should not be run by any free market policies.

Not unless it's spelled out in the policy somewhere

They've already agreed to pay for part of it. The insurance company that is.


To me it comes down to this. It costs money to run a fire department. Putting out the fire in this case, to me, presents a pretty damn clear endangerment to the funding of the fire department. Blame a dumb policy that allows something like this to happen. Don't blame the fire-fighters and their bosses. They have to keep open for business for the greater good. Putting out fires for free works against that. It just does. At the end of the the day they chose not to do something that might end up costing them way more than just one fire. I can't fault them for that. Is it more decent to put the fire out and watch everyone else stop paying the fees and therefore have to curtail the service? Not to me it isn't. They had to choose between two crappy choices.

How are you going to stay in business when no one feels like they can trust you anymore? Look at all this national exposure. Do you think anyone is going to want to fund these guys after this? They would have been much better off reaching a settlement after the fact like every other subscription service in Tennessee. They sacrificed long term financing for short term gain. Instead of getting a first round pick in two years they decided to take a 7th round pick this year.

Fire chiefs: We won't watch a home burn » Knoxville News Sentinel (http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2010/oct/08/fire-chiefs-we-wont-watch-a-home-burn/)
Blount County residents who fail to subscribe to fire services for $110 will be presented with a hefty bill after firefighters finish their duties at a house fire.

McClanahan said it amounts to $2,200 for the initial call and $1,100 for every hour past the first two that firefighters are on the scene.

Wheeler said his department has no set fee but does ask the homeowner to assign to the fire department any insurance money designated for compensating the fire department.

This system might be worse. It's amazing that so many Bengal players have been arrested.
P8MAsmMLtqs

Yes seriously. How come the 30%-50% of my income that goes to the government isn't being used to pay for fire service in my area? How come that instead of trying to find out where I am the operator has to verify weather or not I paid a due, which for all I know could have been lost in the mail? Certain things need to be free market and others need to be socialism or whatever you want to call it. Fire service in and of itself should not be run by any free market policies.

No disagreement here. The system sucked. I haven't argued that it doesn't. I am simply pointing out what so many people seem to forget. The fire-fighters operated within the system that was setup. If you want to argue that the $75 subscription fee is dumb I'll completely agree. It shouldn't be left up to individuals to make payments like that. But if you want to argue that standing there watching it burn was somehow "obviously" the wrong choice I can't agree.

How are you going to stay in business when no one feels like they can trust you anymore? Look at all this national exposure. Do you think anyone is going to want to fund these guys after this? They would have been much better off reaching a settlement after the fact like every other subscription service in Tennessee. They sacrificed long term financing for short term gain. Instead of getting a first round pick in two years they decided to take a 7th round pick this year.

This is also true. it is also 100% hindsight.

All I want to argue is that what they did that day was try and make the best decision they could giving the crappy choices. Don't fault them for that.

Hard to believe this is even a debate.


Couldn't agree with you more:food-smil

This is also true. it is also 100% hindsight.

All I want to argue is that what they did that day was try and make the best decision they could giving the crappy choices. Don't fault them for that.

I guess we're not to different there. I don't blame the firefighters themselves, rather I blame the city officials who enacted such a policy and the fire chief who had the power to prevent his men from doing anything. Ironically if I was a firefighter in that fire department I would have tried to put out the fire, especially with so many witnesses there. Best case scenario the fire gets put out. Worst case I get punched on national TV which results in job offers pouring in from around the country due to the fact that I tried to protect the honor of firefighters everywhere and the subscription system of South Fulton still gets the same amount of media coverage.