fire dept in tenn lets house burn down cuz ownwer forgot to pay $75 annual fee

[Grizzly4x4]

What you guys are missing is that the fire department in question is the city's fire department. The county does not have fire coverage, only the city, and they have offered coverage to people outside the city limits for a very low fee of $75. The residents of the town pay for the department through their own city tax structure. It's not like this department is charging every person a fee. It's a service they've offered to people who are not residents of their town with a small fee to offset it.

I could see having this type of animosity if the department was just money hungry. They're not. $75 per year is a friggin' insanely low price to pay.

The guy that this thread was originally started to discuss had a fire before. He hadn't paid the fee. They put it out and he had to go in later and pay the fee. When it came time to renew, he refused once again, thinking that they would just take care of him again, and he could just have a repeat of before. This time, they didn't come running. He should have known better, but instead, he chose to try to abuse the system. It's people like this who ruin things for everybody else.

Thank you for clarifying. $75 per year is cheap fire protection for sure and I stand behind the fire dept even more since they are offering the sevice to people who don't pay taxes to fund them.

 

[Grizzly4x4]

Exactly. Their county is FAILING to provide basic services to its citizens.

So they should move or do something about it.

 

[EvilTwin v2]

Exactly. Their county is FAILING to provide basic services to its citizens.

Exactly. The county has failed here. However, everybody is on the city of South Fulton, who has offered a very affordable service to residents of the county, because the county has failed. So far, you're the only one that seems to have that view instead of blaming a city for the faults of the county.

The city fire department still assesses the scene and assures that nobody is in danger before deciding to not act. If there were a possibility that somebody were in danger, they would and have acted. Is it the city's responsibility to protect people that are not residents? The thing is that publicity like this could result in the city deciding to terminate the service all together and just take care of the tax paying residents within their borders and fawk everyone else. It'd be easier that way.

 

[JeremyH]

So they should move or do something about it.

Seriously? I know that the newest charred pile of rubble used to be on wheels, but to tell someone to move because their local politicians are terrible? :roll:

 

[JeremyH]

However, everybody is on the city of South Fulton, who has offered a very affordable service to residents of the county, because the county has failed. So far, you're the only one that seems to have that view instead of blaming a city for the faults of the county.

I am not blaming the city at all...as I have mentioned, the county has failed them. Personally, I dont think that it is right to let all of someone's belongings burn to the ground and I would never sit by and watch.

I have been in that position (see my earlier post)....perhaps this newest homeless person was unaware of the law as well.

The thing is that publicity like this could result in the city deciding to terminate the service all together and just take care of the tax paying residents within their borders and fawk everyone else. It'd be easier that way.

Hopefully it will. And hopefully the county uses it's resident's taxes to build an appropriate fire station so that no more of them become homeless while people look on...

 

[Grizzly4x4]

Seriously? I know that the newest charred pile of rubble used to be on wheels, but to tell someone to move because their local politicians are terrible? :roll:

That's what I'd do. Look out for my family since the local politicians won't.

When I bought my first house the neighborhood went down hill fast. Did I wait until a drug dealer or a gang moved in next door? :roll: Hell no, I sold my house, lost money, and moved to a safer neighborhood where my kids were safe to walk to school.

 

[korn_2956]

They shoulda put it out. Wonder if the cops around there work the same. Don't pay and they wont save your life.

 

[EvilTwin v2]

They shoulda put it out. Wonder if the cops around there work the same. Don't pay and they wont save your life.

I am willing to bet that the cops around there only work with in their jurisdiction.

 

[badhoopty]

i'm ignorant to any details that have prolly been discussed, but dang it just doesnt seem right to let somebodies home burn down.

what if the people who owned that house just couldnt afford to pay?

i grew up poor as hell. remember MANY times using candles or oil lamps for light and the potbelly stove for heat, or my grandpa riding a horse into town because he was saving his gas in the truck... i can picture my grandparents back in those days in this situation and it upsets me.

 

[Rig Rocker]

i'm ignorant to any details that have prolly been discussed, but dang it just doesnt seem right to let somebodies home burn down.

what if the people who owned that house just couldnt afford to pay?

i grew up poor as hell. remember MANY times using candles or oil lamps for light and the potbelly stove for heat, or my grandpa riding a horse into town because he was saving his gas in the truck... i can picture my grandparents back in those days in this situation and it upsets me.

Yep. I'm sure many of us grew up poor and lived month to month, or day to day

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

If the owner doesn't like the $75 fee to keep the fire department funded then he should move somewhere else. Screw telling the fire dept to go in and put it out, if the owner doesn't care enough to pay the fees then why should anyone else care what happens to the house.

"thumbsup"

Pay the fee or dont have fire protection.
Pay for insurance or suffer the consequences when you hit someone. It sucks that they had to let it burn down, however its simple you pay the fee or dont get fire protection.

Yup. If you want something you have to pay for it.

Thats just ****ing retarded! We already pay for the fire dept through our taxes. It is just another way to fleece the citizens of more money, and make the poor suffer more.

Exactly. Their county is FAILING to provide basic services to its citizens.

They use the same or very similar system around here in the more rural areas. If the town has less than 10k people in it, chances are good that all the fire fighters are voluntary and all costs are covered by donations, benefits, and yearly fire protection fees. There are small fire and emergency response centers everywhere around here, but none are manned. They're only used when needed. Can you imagine how many people would bitch about paying taxes for something that spends such a great deal of its time doing nothing? They'd have a flippin' fit.

Around here there are many "towns" with less than a couple hundred people in it, and there are thousands and thousands of people that don't live in any town at all and are somewhat (or quite a bit) removed from civilization. It would cost an arm and a leg to tax them enough for full fire department coverage considering the amount of land they would have to cover. $75 a year is cheap.

It is also offered as an option, as many people buy property but do not have any permanent structures built. So there again, why charge a tax when a significant portion of people don't need the coverage?

If you're too dumb to buy fire coverage, you get what you deserve.

If you're too poor to buy fire coverage, you probably shouldn't own a house to begin with.


And if you think paying for fire protection is bullshit...we have to pay $50 a year (per family) for any trips we might be unfortunate enough to take in the MedEvac helicopter. Otherwise we get billed for the whole shebang. They'll still come and get you if you don't pay the $50, but you better be prepared for the bill thats coming...

 

[Natedog]

total bulls**t they should be held accountable as well as the mayor he acted like oh well they didn't pay to bad so sad . wtf is this world coming to can't believe that we are turning into such a f'ed up society that we have to pay for fire protection and if we don't or forget to pay then the firefighters will come out and bring there sticks and marshmallows :evil:

The home-owner should have paid the $75. However, those so-called "firemen" should all be ashamed of themselves! They should turn in their gear, badge and resign. :evil:

I'll agree that letting it burn to the ground was pretty extreme. I think they should have a policy that says it's $75 per year, or $7,500 per incident, your choice.

My problem is with the people who's house burnt, they are pimping themselves out to every media outlet across the country trying to get everyone to feel sorry for them, no doubt in prep for a lawsuit they are going to file and probably be handed millions of dollars.

The system is totally fawked.

I agree.

 

[JeremyH]

If you're too dumb to buy fire coverage, you get what you deserve.

If you're too poor to buy fire coverage, you probably shouldn't own a house to begin with.

Never thought I'd read that come from your liberal keyboard...

I agree, the homeowners should have paid. However, I can see both sides since I have been in a similar situation...one where I was unaware that the city required a form to be filled out for burglar alarm response.

 

[TwistedXT]

chit costs money - stop paying your security system company for 2 years and see how fast they are to tell the police that someones stealing your chit. Im with jason on this one - they should have had a emergency fee in place that if you didnt pay - its going to cost you dearly. in some places - taxes dont pay for public services - so a BUSINESS like this has to be generated for peoples safety.... As a business, the fire departmentr was in the right - did their part and made sure no one was in danger and then took care of a paying customers property. That may have been a "fire truck" and "fire men" but that was not a "fire dept" - it is a saftey corporation that owns a fire truck to assist its customers.




or i could just be talking out my ass....

 

[EvilTwin v2]

chit costs money - stop paying your security system company for 2 years and see how fast they are to tell the police that someones stealing your chit. Im with jason on this one - they should have had a emergency fee in place that if you didnt pay - its going to cost you dearly. in some places - taxes dont pay for public services - so a BUSINESS like this has to be generated for peoples safety.... As a business, the fire departmentr was in the right - did their part and made sure no one was in danger and then took care of a paying customers property. That may have been a "fire truck" and "fire men" but that was not a "fire dept" - it is a saftey corporation that owns a fire truck to assist its customers.




or i could just be talking out my ass....

I agree. Except there's one point that people seem to be ignoring.

The people who are asked to pay a fee live outside the city limits. This is a city fire department. They were nice enough to offer a service to people in surrounding areas for a small fee. After all, the towns people have to pay taxes to fund the department. The department has no obligation to help people outside of their city limits. They offered the service because they wanted to help people of the surrounding area. For the price of 3 or 4 cases of beer or a couple cartons of cigarettes, the people could have been covered. Instead, they figured they'd buy beer and cigarettes and just assume that people would help.

 

[JeremyH]

For the price of 3 or 4 cases of beer or a couple cartons of cigarettes, the people could have been covered. Instead, they figured they'd buy beer and cigarettes and just assume that people would help.

That's a hell of an assumption you made about those folks. :roll:

BTW, if you read about that county, you'll see that they liked the revenue from these services so much, that they decided to apply it to quite a few cities and it's surrounding residents in that area.

 

[Rig Rocker]

"thumbsup"

If you're too poor to buy fire coverage, you probably shouldn't own a house to begin with.

What if they are renters? They are just assed out because the landlord forgot to make the payment??? I know you are going to say they should have renters insurance. Well, many people are just scraping by and have had to make major cuts, and im sure renters insurance payment or food is not a hard choice.
I currently work in property management, and I see renters insurance claims denied regularly. They think it's there for them until they try to get help. Then they are knocking on the countys door asking for help and housing. Like Jeremy said, now they are homeless and much more of a burden than $75 on the county.

You must be living well, or you would see it from a poor persons perspective too. I was born in a town of less than 100 and I know all to well about being poor, and living rural.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

Never thought I'd read that come from your liberal keyboard...

I agree, the homeowners should have paid. However, I can see both sides since I have been in a similar situation...one where I was unaware that the city required a form to be filled out for burglar alarm response.

I bought a new one.

There was a situation like that in Phoenix years ago...some guy buys some property that is annexed from the city and scoffs when he's asked about buying fire protection. Later that year his $300k house burns to the ground while the fire department watches. So its not just about poor people...

 

[spankbomb]

Exactly. Their county is FAILING to provide basic services to its citizens.

Then people should move away from that county or ante up the necessary taxes (sales, property, etc.) to pay for services.

The common misconception in this country is that government provides services automatically. The truth is someone has to pay for those services, and paying for those services have taken our Federal debt to over $15T, or over 100% GDP...

 

[JeremyH]

...and paying for those services have taken our Federal debt to over $15T, or over 100% GDP...

Ha! So the billions that we are shipping out to various countries all over the world had nothing to do with it? What about the billions handed out to these "to big to fail" corporations? I bet that money would fund one or two county firehouses. :roll:

The cost of these services are a drop in the swimming pool that is our national debt.

BTW, I doubt for folks who cant/wont pay the $75 that packing up and moving is something that is economically possible.