The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
And they watched it burn, again...
Before you comment read my whole post...
Well the story has broke again. I made this prediction in the many threads from the last fire in 2010 that got the FFN boards lit up. History repeats itself in the fire service. The homeowner this time admits they knew the past story of "Pay for Spray" in 2010 and about the $75.00 fee. They said quote, "never thought it would happen to them."
Here is the news video: http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/Home-burns-while-firefighters-...
In my opinion, the FD who refuses to put out the fire is doing the right thing. As hard as that may seem, if the FD provides the service for free, then nobody in the county will pay. This story has been going on for many years. For those who don't know, the county has NO fire department, the residents know this. Many move there because it is cheaper to live there. Past studies have been done to reccommend providing fire protection services but it will cost the homewowner more in their county taxes. The county administrators have decided to keep it "Pay for Spray" meaning a neighboring fire department who does NOT have any jurisdictional requirement to respond to your county residence, is allowed to offer their services to each individual homeowner for $75.00 per year. If you pay the $75.00 subscription service, you will get a response and mitigation from the neighboring FD. This is not mutual aid, this is not automatic aid. This is paying for fire protection from a contractor. If you don't pay the fee, the FD has told everyone numerous times, no pay = no service.
In my opinion the lack of FD action keeps the integrity of the lousy system in place. The people who pay are getting services when needed and they are NOT subsidizing their neighbors lack of payment. The fire department unfortunately gets caught up in the media and the "passion police" when the story of "they just watched it burn" After the last story unfolded, many neighboring chiefs came out and tried to explain how small of a budget this fire department has, one chief even mentioned the fire chief sometimes, empty's the soda machine to buy fuel for his trucks with change.
So instead of continuously being the bad guy, I suggest the Mayor and the Fire Chief tell the county administrators that they are done offering subscriptions next year. Therefore no more subscription service to the county and the COUNTY will now have to fund their own protection services. The administrators will then have to assess a fire tax to their residents to fund either a volunteer fire department(s) or pay for services from another FD for every county residence.
Time to end the subsciption mess...... it is a black eye to the one's who have to enforce the rules and the integrity.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Nathan Henderson on
-
This article is bias journalsim all the way.
With the county residents repeatedly voting to keep this system in place, they can not put the blame on a neighboring dept if they don't pay for the spray. Even with the economy, people can find a way to pay a $75 yearly fee ($6.25 a month). Especially for something like fire protection.
It's too bad that these epople lost their house but they were quoted as to knowing the policy and just deciding not to pay because they didn't think it would happen to them. Obviously they knew the risk and were willing to chance it. That makes it no ones fault but theirs as unfortunate as it may be.
I would have a tough time watching a house burn after I arrived on scene but as others have said, if they compromise the system once, more people will expect it. Which in turn will make more problems for the city fd.
If I were a resident of that county, I would be pushing for a dept to be formed. It might cost more but when you factor in response times, availability, and other factors, I would be ok with paying more money for services based out of the area I was living in.
One thing I am curious about is what the percentages/total numbers are of properties in that county who pay and don't pay that fee. For that price I would guess that the vast majority of the residents pay the fee. Does anyone know the numbers?
-
Permalink Reply by Texas HazMat on
-
I don't like it at all! Stinks of the bad old days with the fire fighting groups paid by the insurance companies. The only thing worse would have been if they were dancing on the truck singing burn baby burn or F I R E. Have you guys not set up fire districts with a two or three cent per electric meter surcharge??????? There are countless ways to get a small amout of money from lots of people. Do your firggn research and provied the service. Remember the oath you took !!!!! I remember when i took mine it didn't say "EXCEPT THOES WHO DON'T PAY'. Christ if that was the case we wouldn't make 35% of our ambulance calls. Your being paid to sit or fight fire. I know siting is easier. Great PR guys you make us all look bad.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
texas hazmat,
It's not really a question of whether you like it or not, it's the way the citizens of the unincorporated area of Obion County, who LAST year voted down a tax increase to FUND THEIR OWN FIRE DEPARTMENT, want it.
South Fulton Fire Department is funded by the residents of the city of South Fulton, they EXTEND the opportunity to be covered by the SFFD for a $75 subscription fee per year.
To make the comment about singing or dancing shows just how little you bother to read the previous posts or the link. I guess you just jump in and shoot from the lip without letting silly ass things like facts get in your way.
To quote yourself, " Do your firggn research ..." The house that burned was NOT in the City of South Fulton, they were offered and declined to pay, the $75 subscription fee and so were NOT entitled to fire protection.
As SO MANY in here have already pointed out, it was nothing less than not having car insurance and then, after having an accident, expecting an insurance company to cover your accident.
Given that you don't bother to understand the issue much less read any of the other replies, your giving them ideas on how to bill is...well, ludicrous. I guess in texas it's considered rude to muddy up an opinion with facts. But then, that's just my opinion.
P.s. you 'might' want to scroll back a page or so and READ what a retired FF from the very same fire department YOU ARE bad mouthing has to say about the issue. Sheesh, can anyone say 'mutt.'
P.p.s. I bumped the discussions from the very same situation last year. You might want to read through both discussions to get a better feel for the situation.
-
-
Thanks Jack,
In no way was I meaning to disrespect any of our hard working guys. I have taken my team across city lines to do an initial attack until the other city got their equipment on scene. Got days off for it, but it was the right thing to do.
The point to my statement was, that they (ADMINISTRATION) have had a year to look at additional lines of revenues. If they do not have fire districts then maybe they should look into it. We had funding issued in our rural areas and had to go the state legislature to get them approved taxing. It takes some time but now anybody can set up district.
Taxing was and is a bad word but we have accomplished this by one or a combination of means.
- Property tax
- Water meter tax
- Gas meter tax
- Electric meter tax
Residential customers were billed one rate and commercial customers (because of higher loss potential) were bill a higher rate. Water, Gas and Electric companies charge a flat rate of X cents per meter per month times the number of meters. Simple math. Most people don’t complain about paying six to eighteen dollars a year.
Everybody’s frustration is noted and its unfortunate that the problem was not corrected.
Thanks again for you comments.
-
Permalink Reply by Bob Callahan on
-
Texas ...
With all due respect, everything that you mentioned likely has to be voted on by the citizens to be put in place.
And those same citizens have voted multiple times not to have atax of any type to form a county fire department. They also would not, given that history, vote to approve the formation of a fire district.
The simple fact is that the residents of this county have spoken loud and clear on more than one occasion that they do not wish to have a tax-based fire department.
And they do have the fire protection that they have repeatedly voted for.
That's a very different situation than responding in your tax-based FD across the line the the area of another tax-based FD. We do that all the time as well. But SFFD does not have that responsibility, and won't until the county goes to a tax-based system, which the citizens have clearly stated they don't want.
-
Permalink Reply by Pararescue on
-
I fully agree John. This isn't the 1800's where you get a plaque placed on your lawn to show you paid your "due's". If you stood up and swore to protect life and property, damn it, do your fing job! If it's outside of your "response area" then don't go. By showing up it makes YOU look ignorant and your failing (Epically) with the Duty to Act laws. And Where the hell are your MORALS??? If I travel to TN and get into a car accident and am pinned, are you going to ask if I have $75 so you can cut me out??? Or what if it was a family members house and they didn't pay? Would you do the same thing to teach them a lesson?
John I think this must be a northern states thing. Glad I'm in NY!
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
If you stood up and swore to protect life and property, damn it, do your fing job! If it's outside of your "response area" then don't go. By showing up it makes YOU look ignorant and your failing (Epically) with the Duty to Act laws. And Where the hell are your MORALS???
Well if you followed along the issue here, you would understand the orders given. The reason the FD responded was because there are subscribers who did pay the fee and also entitled from keeping the fire spreading to their property. So the answer of "don't go" doesn't apply because there are people who did pay a fee. Also, since each individual household is thus a contracted service, there is no "duty to act" for someone who doesn't pay.....why is this such a difficult thing to comprehend?
Morals? Do you honestly think the guys like standing around and watching things burn? No, but it is the position they are forced into because of the orders given. Sorry Jason, orders are followed for a reason.....or are you suggesting freelancing then? Instead of looking at the FD, where is the outcry against such a stupid policy of subscription service in the first place, and how about looking at the elected officials who make the assinine decisions. Take the damn emotions out of things and look at the facts.
If I travel to TN and get into a car accident and am pinned, are you going to ask if I have $75 so you can cut me out??? Or what if it was a family members house and they didn't pay? Would you do the same thing to teach them a lesson?
Where in does it say a subscription service is for MVAs....don't be so naive. Pay attention, the subscription service is per home/property, this is in lieu of paying a universal tax or fee for FIRE protection......nothing about EMS or auto, etc. If by "family" member's house you mean a FF's family, well then yes, the same rules should apply, why would they not. However, this also shows a reason for personal responsibility...............Watch the video and you will see even the "victims" didn't pay because they thought this wouldn't happen to them. Stop letting emotions cloud decisions and facts.
-
Permalink Reply by FETC on
-
Yes Texas,
It seems the passion patrol who are here calling on "The Oath" can't seem to comprehend, that this area HAS NO FIRE DEPARTMENT. This is a neighboring vounteer city department, running on pennies, for which offers subscription service, $75.00, or 20 cents a day to the county nearby. Now if it was a mutual aid area, that had a fire department in place, then sure I would be pissed if they stood by and watched it burn. I can't understand how we keep getting firefighters on here saying the SFFD is a disgrace, or should not be allowed to wear a FD insignia.
Get a grip fellas. The entire county understands they live in area with NO FIRE DEPARTMENT. But when a crisis unfolds, they EXPECT someone to come and do something.
Guess what, go get a quote from a contractor to replace your roof. It is too much money to do and you can't afford it so you decide to pray that it will not rain ever again. BUT the next time it does rain, even months later... call up that contractor and tell him you need him to come down RIGHT NOW and fix that roof because it is ruining your personal belongings. Better yet call up the newspaper and have them report on the lack of free service you seem to feel entitled to....
Sorry the world doesn't work that way.. . or at least that is how some Obion County residents appear to want it to work.
-
Permalink Reply by Wm. Boyd Howell on
-
I appreciate this post.
But like a few percent of the people on here I think that something different should be done. In the first case, the fire was originally reported as a brush fire as a result from burning trash, they did not respond until the neighbor who paid called because his grass was burning. If I remember correctly the SFFD was on scene when the fire spread to the secondary structure and then on to the dwelling structure. (Correct me if I am wrong.) If that be the case, how much more good would have been done had the SFFD sprayed some wet stuff on the hot when it was just a brush fire? They could have saved the residence.
Now I am not sure how the insurance works in Obion County, TN. I am currently a part-paid firefighter so when I say this please bare in mind that I am speaking from what my department does in MO. If you live outside of the city limits, we have a subscription fee, however with that said if you do not pay it and God forbid your structure or property catches fire, we will respond and we will extinguish said fire without thinking twice. If you have not paid the fee then we will send a nice pretty bill to your insurance agency. And this is where my full-time job comes in to the picture, as that I work in home insurance. If we receive a claim for a fire, and subsequently a bill from a fire department for services rendered, we pay that immediately. That is what homeowners insurance does. Even the nasty lender placed insurance that covers only the dwelling structure on the property.
With that said, if SFFD is recognized fire department with the State of TN, then they could file a bill with the homeowner's insurance company and receive compensation for the services rendered. Also on the flip side I am not sure how the worker compensation insurance would work in this case with Obion County as that they have refused via public vote to not provide fire service for their residents. If it does not cover them then this is something that should be brought back to the county admin for review again.
I just know that me, personally, could not respond to a fire and stand by watching the fire burn without grabbing a line and trying to do something. I guess I better never move to Obion County, TN. is all I can say.
-
-
If someone decides NOT to pay $75 per year for fire protection, what makes you think they have fire insurance?
-
-
Well there's another loop in my logic, I guess! LOL.
If there is a mortgage or loan that is out against the property, then there is a Catch 22 in the loan documents that requires the home to be covered by at minimum a Hazard insurance policy. This is what I was referring to when I said the "lender placed" insurance policies. All of which I know to full and well of, as that my company has over 80% of the market in this regard.
If they own the home out right and there is not mortgage on the property then they have the choice to not cover the structure with insurance, depending on said State's laws or local ordinance, of course.
Either way most likely, there will be a policy in place to cover the structure.
In the first case in 2010, there was a policy on the residence. That is fact. Therefore my logic could have worked, at least in that case. Now this latest incident occurred to a mobile home. Most of which are not on a loan for a long term, some are depending on the variables. So as far as it is concerned, I am not sure how my logic would work out.
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
That is exactly why the SFFD doesn't do post-extinguishment billing.
All of the arguments against SFFD's county subscription policies are hypotheticals based upon situations that are different than the reality that SFFD faces every day.
And more importantly, when there is no local FD (in this case, no county FD) and the area either is outside the ISO 5-mile limits and/or the area has no rated water supply system, then the homeowner's insurance (if any) is going to be based on an ISO rating of 10 regardless of whether a fire department responds or not. In essence, an ISO rating of 10 equals an insurance assumption of "no fire protection" and the presence or absence of a fire subscription is a moot point.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
