Thread:

Firefighters Watch House Burn To Ground

Originally Posted by Wet

Same difference regarding pay. In my experiences, it's been up front. Maybe because I was driving shit.

LOL.........

I get the point they "the city" are making. But couldn't they have just made the fine like 5k and then people would still pay their fees instead of incurring the hefty fine.
I would think the insurance company will be suing the guy for not protecting their investment and the city for nor doing their job.

Originally Posted by rrrr

No one seems to consider the city of South Fulton runs the FD, not the chief or firemen. Not their fault at all.

What if a fire broke out in the city and killed someone while the FD was in the county? The 911 dispatcher had already determined there was no threat to humans at the fire...the dispatcher and the chief don't have the authority to send the trucks on a run that policy doesn't allow.

Who decides what the city and county fire policies are? THE VOTERS. This arrangement had been in place over 20 years. If the county residents wanted a FD they could have voted to spend the tax dollars for one.

I'm rather surprised that CA people are complaining about this...government for freeloaders is one of the things contributing to IOUs and the budget crisis in your state.

Read the article................the fire department was ON SCENE, so your "scenario" doesn't apply here. Had the fire department not been on scene, it would have been a different situation. However, they were there and stood by & did nothing to help the man who's house was on fire.

Once on scene the Captain says what goes. Do you really think that his firefighters would have ignored his orders if he told them to fight the fire?

The man also offered to pay any expenses incurred in fighting the fire and was told to pound sand.

Yet more proof how the mighty dollar outweighs common sense and human dignity.

Originally Posted by rrrr

Read the facts....

They were not on the scene until the neighbor that had paid the fee called 911. The mobile home was fully involved with they arrived, it's a moot point.

Do you think the captain should jeopardize his job by doing something he was not authorized to do?

Ok Mr. Facts..............show me where it says that the house was "fully involved."

"They did, however, come out when Cranick's neighbor -- who'd already paid the fee -- called 911 because he worried that the fire might spread to his property. Once they arrived, members of the South Fulton department stood by and watched Cranick's home burn; they sprang into action only when the fire reached the neighbor's property."

From what I read, they stood by & watched his house burn.................

Do you really think the Captain would lose his job for doing something he took an oath to do?

Once again $$$$ overrides common sense.................

I can't help thinking that if the home owner decided NOT to pay the $75.00, how/why would I think that he could/would pay for the full cost of the service?

Gotta think that the bill would be in the thousands. In my mind, he decided to 'self-insure' and made the wrong decision.

No pay = no service.

CC

Originally Posted by little rowe boat

This is what I forsee happening. One of the left leaning liberal attorneys is going to get ahold of this and sue the Fire department for big $$$. The FD. will then pay the judgement against them and then suspend any service to the rural area outside of their city limits. Then all of the homeowners lose.

Are you sure you can find a left leaning liberal in Tennessee? I thought they were all Conservative Bible thumping rednecks........

Yep. Agreed with your statement about the lawsuit. If you watch the video, the homeowner states he simply "forgot" to pay the $75.00 this year. He says he has paid it each & every year before, but it slipped his mind this year. All of this could have been avoided had the powers that be said "Ok, we'll fight the fire and bill you $75.00 plus a late fee", which I'm sure the homeowner would have gladly paid.

IMO, nobody wins with the way this was handled.

Originally Posted by rrrr

HE DOESN'T LIVE IN THE FREEKIN' CITY! He lives in the county, outside the jurisdiction of the city. If you're going to comment at least get the facts...

The FD had no authority to respond to the call, the city set the policy.

Do they provide a service for this area if you pay the $75.00? YES
So yes the city does cover this area for a fee. Do you understand that?
If I was a firemen on scene I would have done something. Hell I am not a firemen and I would have helped.