• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Resident claims she lost home because firefighters ignored blaze

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Thump553 said:
The homeowner paid that bill in prior years, he just missed this one somehow. What if he never got mailed a bill this year by the fire dept?

I disagree with the whole concept of a la carte essential government services. Rural or urban has nothing to do with it. Should Detriot, NYC, etc. stop sending cops on calls into bad neighborhoods because the caller didn't pay some fee?
Click to expand...

In the article linked the wife stated that they
"just didn't get around to it this year.", which implies that they had the paper work but just didn't bother to go pay for it.
 
Lanyap said:
This process and the policy were put in place back in 1990. Why are you trying to blame the current politicians because they are repubs?
Click to expand...

Not only was it just put in place in 1990 but before that there was NOTHING available to those living outside of the town limits until this type of extra funding to provide fire fighting service was enacted.
 
DucatiMonster696 said:
Not only was it just put in place in 1990 but before that there was NOTHING available to those living outside of the town limits until this type of extra funding to provide fire fighting service was enacted.
Click to expand...

Just goes to show you simply can't help some people without taking them to raise. Give them access to something desirable for cost (or less) and they simply feel entitled to have it for free.
 
Gonad the Barbarian said:
The fire department could have either:

A) fought the fire and sorted any issues over costs and fees afterward, using the courts if necessary.

B) let the house burn down.
Click to expand...

They tried option A. 75% of the structural calls in the county are for rural areas. They tried collecting $500 for every call out to rural areas, but less than 50% of people paid. The municipals had no way to legal way to force the people to pay, since the people lived outside of the city. That is why they switched to a subscription service.

http://troy.troytn.com/Obion County...tation Presented to the County Commission.pdf
 
BoberFett said:
Sorry sir, I guess your wife wasn't worth $75, huh?
Click to expand...

Yes yes. I know the libertarian line but it wouldnt look good on a national level if the firefighters let someone die over $75. For some reason I'm sure the majority of you would still say the firefighters did the right thing 😕
 
DucatiMonster696 said:
Not only was it just put in place in 1990 but before that there was NOTHING available to those living outside of the town limits until this type of extra funding to provide fire fighting service was enacted.
Click to expand...

And following this, I'm sure the fire department will discontinue the option of buying into the service for the folks in that other area. Observe how insurance companies have gotten out of the business of writing new health policies for minors since they can't refuse those with pre-existing conditions. Similar dynamics - obliging the fire company to fight a fire regardless of payment status means it's far easier (and probably legally prudent) to stop offering the service to the other rural area residents outside their jurisdiction. Problem solved - no more houses burning down while the firemen watch because they won't be coming anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top