Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Maybe they should have paid for the $75 fire protection fee each year. It's not like this is January, this is the last month of the year, so they blew off the fire fee all year long. Is it any different then not paying for garbage pickup?
[quote=Swingblade;22015649][quote=TriMT7;22015559]Any firefighter who sits and watches a home BURN, regardless of whether a fee was paid or not, should retire immediately. Moral cowards. More examples of eschewing pragmatism and what is right in favor of profits.
Quote:
The story explained that if the fire dept put out fires for those who refused to pay the fee then no one would pay the fee. Get it.
Oh. Right. Because doctors being forced by law to treat the uninsured and infirm that walk through their doors has put such a kabosh on private health care premiums.
Again, what is stopping them from rendering services now, and asking for compensation later, via collections or billing the homeowner's insurance?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swingblade
As far as profits this is not about that, the money is used for equipment and expenses. I would gladly pay a measly 75 bucks a year for that protection, I think the fire dept did the right thing.
It's dishonorable. Firefighters, like policemen, should not ask who has or has not paid the bill before acting to protect and serve. They are held to a higher standard of action. Those who do not pay their property tax bills still get police-run and city protection.
This isn't garbage pickup. This is life and death.
Business concerns over people and safety. Par for the course.
I'm assuming the fire service is a private business. Therefore not union.
I don't know whether it's union or not but it really doesn't matter. The fire company is funded through taxes in a nearby town/city. They provide service to rural areas in the surrounding area that do not have their own fire department for the fee.
Again, what is stopping them from rendering services now, and asking for compensation later, via collections or billing the homeowner's insurance?
It's dishonorable. Firefighters, like policemen, should not ask who has or has not paid the bill before acting to protect and serve. They are held to a higher standard of action. Those who do not pay their property tax bills still get police-run and city protection.
This isn't garbage pickup. This is life and death.
Business concerns over people and safety. Par for the course.
What would YOU do, if you had paid the 75$, and your home was destroyed, your pets killed and possible lost family members, because the fire department was out saving the home of someone who DIDN'T pay the fee, required to help hire firefighters, train them, and pay for equipment and upkeep?
What would YOU do, if you had paid the 75$, and your home was destroyed, your pets killed and possible lost family members, because the fire department was out saving the home of someone who DIDN'T pay the fee, required to help hire firefighters, train them, and pay for equipment and upkeep?
Makes no difference to me in the end, because the other guy could just as easily HAVE PAID for the service, and my house would have still burnt down because the firefighters were engaged in saving that home from fire at the apparent exact same time my own house went up in flames.
What would YOU do, if you had paid the 75$, and your home was destroyed, your pets killed and possible lost family members, because the fire department was out saving the home of someone who DIDN'T pay the fee, required to help hire firefighters, train them, and pay for equipment and upkeep?
This question is to TRiMT7, he did not use the quotation feature correctly.
There may be other things involved, for example the fire companies own insurance may not cover them in this situation.
No, not billing their OWN insurance company, but passing the bill on as an expense to the homeowner's insurance company (if there is one).
We're talking SEVENTY FIVE DOLLARS here.
I'm sure the community members or homeowners themselves would pay AFTER the service is rendered. At least that's what we would expect in civilized society.
We stopped "private fire services for pay" about 200 years ago in the vast majority of the country for a reason. The county should impose the tax automatically.
my question is why does the fire department go to the scene if the people didn't subscribe? Doesn't it cost money to deploy? When they deploy and know they aren't going to do anything... what is the purpose of that? Why are they wasting the fees others have paid?
If they are there to gloat then I say they are wrong. If they don't help those that don't pay. then stay at the station. Hopefully the people did pay for the insurance.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
