Firefighting Fee
- Thread starter ToriAllen
- Start date
jokersarewild
New member
I'm with Eddo. He knew the fee was there. I watched the news report on this story. They guy said he forgot about it.
Then his house burned down. I think he learned one **** of a lesson, eh?
Before you call the firefighters ********, realize that they have a job to do. Their wages have to get paid. If they started working for people that didn't pay, nobody would pay. Then they couldn't eat. Then we'd have no firefighters.
Notice, also, the neighbor tried to give them $500 to fight the fire, and the firefighters said it was too late. Seems reprehensible, right?
Let me put it this way: Do you pay your car insurance right when you get in an accident? No. You make regular payments before because if they have no money to pay for your damages, then your car doesn't get fixed. Flood insurance? Homeowners insurance? Same thing. If we "forget" to pay our car insurance long enough, we aren't insured. Simple as that. That's what happened to him.
Pay the **** fee.
Then his house burned down. I think he learned one **** of a lesson, eh?
Before you call the firefighters ********, realize that they have a job to do. Their wages have to get paid. If they started working for people that didn't pay, nobody would pay. Then they couldn't eat. Then we'd have no firefighters.
Notice, also, the neighbor tried to give them $500 to fight the fire, and the firefighters said it was too late. Seems reprehensible, right?
Let me put it this way: Do you pay your car insurance right when you get in an accident? No. You make regular payments before because if they have no money to pay for your damages, then your car doesn't get fixed. Flood insurance? Homeowners insurance? Same thing. If we "forget" to pay our car insurance long enough, we aren't insured. Simple as that. That's what happened to him.
Pay the **** fee.
timesjoke
Active Members
My problem with this is the people pay taxes on their land but the County does not provide any services to the residents paying their taxes. What do their property taxes go to if not for any services like fire and rescue?
Yes, they should have paid the $75, but I don't think you refuse to put out a fire just because they did not pay the $75. What should happen is the city should charge an elevates fee to those who use services and did not pre-pay for them.
At the end of the day I believe it is heartless to just sit there and watch a family home burn to the ground and not lift a finger just because they did not pay $75. What is more important? Humanity or a $75 fee? Is that all each of us are to the Government? If we don't give them money we are no longer entitled to be treated like a human being?
Yes, they should have paid the $75, but I don't think you refuse to put out a fire just because they did not pay the $75. What should happen is the city should charge an elevates fee to those who use services and did not pre-pay for them.
At the end of the day I believe it is heartless to just sit there and watch a family home burn to the ground and not lift a finger just because they did not pay $75. What is more important? Humanity or a $75 fee? Is that all each of us are to the Government? If we don't give them money we are no longer entitled to be treated like a human being?
eddo
New member
it was heartless, but it was also practical.
If the fire department had put the fire out, why should anyone else pay the $75 from now on? I'm not gonna pay if I know they will put my fire out either way. Your elevated fee idea won't keep the Fire Department ready and standing by if something happens. They have to be on call all the time, not just when there is a fire- and they deserve to be paid for being on call.
and TJ, that is an excellent point about where the county property taxes are going. I would be looking into that if this were my home.
On a side note, I would hope if someone's life had been in jeopardy, that steps would have been taken to protect that life. Life > property or a $75 fee.
but it all goes back to the owner shoulda paid the fee.
If the fire department had put the fire out, why should anyone else pay the $75 from now on? I'm not gonna pay if I know they will put my fire out either way. Your elevated fee idea won't keep the Fire Department ready and standing by if something happens. They have to be on call all the time, not just when there is a fire- and they deserve to be paid for being on call.
and TJ, that is an excellent point about where the county property taxes are going. I would be looking into that if this were my home.
On a side note, I would hope if someone's life had been in jeopardy, that steps would have been taken to protect that life. Life > property or a $75 fee.
but it all goes back to the owner shoulda paid the fee.
timesjoke
Active Members
If being practical also means you have to be heartless I don't want to be practical. Humanity should be more than if you can pay a fee to a Government agency or not.
I still don't see your point why an elevated fee would not work. If you pay ahead of time you get a discount, if not you pay a big fee. This happens all the time in the real world.
Take this example, the fire fighters were out there anyway, they responded to the neighbors who did pay the fee to be sure the fire did not spread to their homes. There was no added cost to put out the fire but I do believe there should have been a higher fee for not paying ahead of time.
I do not believe fire fighters should be put in the possition of watching a family home burn down. This is the wrong message, we are telling everyone that the only way they matter is if they pay a fee to the Government.
Me too, I am sure it is a poor County but I would think the city nearby should consider that these County residents still go to their town to spend money and buy their groceries. I would think it just reasonable to work out some agreement at the County level to provide emergency services.
Just because these people do not live inside the city limits, that does not mean they do not add to the economy and vitality of the city.
According to the City, the only way the fire department will respond is if the address is on their list of people who paid their fee, so I am assuming a child trapped in a burning building would fall under that classification too.
True, so what is next eddo? Pay a fee for the police? Where does it end? Fighting fires and crime should be considered basic servises for society, if we are going to make these things conditional to the ability to pay seperate fees, what does that say for how we have evolved as a society?
ToriAllen
New member
My problem is that fires can be very dangerous. I think a life is worth more than $75, so if I were a firefighter all I would be thinking about is a child getting trapped inside. There are a lot of counties that have a fee, but if you don't pay the small fee, they still respond and then give you a large bill. I don't see a problem with that, but not responding to a life threatening situation, even after the person has stated they will pay, seems a little extreme.
Chi
New member
I agree with Tori. Maybe they really did forget to pay the fee, whatever the reason, it's a really high price to pay for a measly $75 bucks. It's so petty on such a grand scale to be able to help someone and just choose not to because of such a stupid technicality. Someone could have died and/or been burned badly. Would they have just watched them burn alive, too?
Stupid law in place preventing them or not, isn't human compassion above that? How can they watch someone's home and entire possesions burn to the ground because of something so stupid? In cases like this, they should just fine people for not paying the fee before and help them anyway. It's not like someone mentioned about insurance, this is a case where they are able to help just choose not to. Insurance is different because you really do have to pay into it to use that money later in case you need to. This is a service, that should be available to everyone. There should be a fee for not paying timely and an even higher fee on top of that when you didn't pay and were helped anyways. It would suck, but still be better than losing everything, including possibly your life.
timesjoke
Active Members
How is he a freeloader if he is charged a large fee to respond to the fire Hugo? Not one person here has said the fire fighting service should be free, we are saying that if he did not pay the lower fee ahead of time, there should still be an option to get fire fighting services at a higher fee.
Now we have fire fighters being buracratic pencil pushers and refusing to help families if their name is not on a list. You like names on lists Hugo? Interesting you mention Hitler, he liked to put names on lists too......
jokersarewild
New member
Does the fire department not require funding? It costs them extra to respond to calls out in the boondocks. You wanna live out there? Fine. But you have to cope with the extra costs of such.
So, say they charge them after the fire. Who's to say they'll pay? Now the fire dept. spent extra money coming out there, doing something they may not have the resources to do, and they possibly won't get any compensation for it. Then the fire dept. has fewer funds to fight fires. Local governments are cutting services to cope with not having money as it is. Would they rather be able to put out the fires of 99% of the population, or possibly not be able to put out any in the future because they have no money?
Oh...and seig heil Hugo
timesjoke
Active Members
Nobody is saying anything about not paying a fee, if we look at the example offered, we see that the fire department had to respond anyway to be sure the fire did not spread to one of the homes in the neighborhod that did pay the fee. While they were out there anyway, why not put out the fire and make an extra $500?
As it was, they drove all the way out there and sat watching the fire burn down that house and the firefighters were on the clock anyway.
Well as this example shows, there is a good possibility that they will be responding to the calls anyway because while one person may not make the payment, the next guy most likely did and they have to be sure the fire does not spread to the home that did pay as what happened in this case.
As far as getting paid, most States place lean rights to property in cases like this, so the City could get their money, maybe not right away but after a fire if they want to put a new home up on the land it cannot pass for a certificate of occupancy unless the leans are taken care of.
Chi
New member
Take whatever recourses they have to make them pay. Put them in jail, make them do community service, whatever. But I would think none of that would be necessary out of a family that would be so grateful that their home and life(s) were saved, that paying a stupid fee and penalty would be the first order of thanks they would be more than willing to do.
hugo
New member
Lets see....there was no legal contract that the individual had with either the city or county to extinguish the fire. Now if they had agreed to put out a fire for a designated fee at the time of the fire the man would have no obligation to pay it. Contracts initiated under duress are invalid. He was a freeloader. No house. Cry me a river. He should have been responsible.
The rise of Hitler started with a fire being put out for free.