The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
Tennessee Firefighters Let Home Burn Over Subscription Issue
JASON HIBBS
WPSD
Reprinted with Permission
OBION COUNTY, Tenn. - Imagine your home catches fire but the local fire department won't respond, then watches it burn. That's exactly what happened to a local family tonight.
Related
- WPSD: Firefighters Watch as Home Burns to the Ground
- WPSD: More Fallout Following House Fire
- USAToday: Firefighters watch house burn because owner hadn't paid $...
- MSNBC: No pay, no spray: Firefighters let home burn
FireEMSBlogs.com Updates
A local neighborhood is furious after firefighters watched as an Obion County, Tennessee, home burned to the ground.
The homeowner, Gene Cranick, said he offered to pay whatever it would take for firefighters to put out the flames, but was told it was too late. They wouldn't do anything to stop his house from burning.
Each year, Obion County residents must pay $75 if they want fire protection from the city of South Fulton. But the Cranicks did not pay.
The mayor said if homeowners don't pay, they're out of luck.
This fire went on for hours because garden hoses just wouldn't put it out. It wasn't until that fire spread to a neighbor's property, that anyone would respond.
Turns out, the neighbor had paid the fee.
"I thought they'd come out and put it out, even if you hadn't paid your $75, but I was wrong," said Gene Cranick.
Because of that, not much is left of Cranick's house.
They called 911 several times, and initially the South Fulton Fire Department would not come.
The Cranicks told 9-1-1 they would pay firefighters, whatever the cost, to stop the fire before it spread to their house.
"When I called I told them that. My grandson had already called there and he thought that when I got here I could get something done, I couldn't," Paulette Cranick.
It was only when a neighbor's field caught fire, a neighbor who had paid the county fire service fee, that the department responded. Gene Cranick asked the fire chief to make an exception and save his home, the chief wouldn't.
We asked him why.
He wouldn't talk to us and called police to have us escorted off the property. Police never came but firefighters quickly left the scene. Meanwhile, the Cranick home continued to burn.
We asked the mayor of South Fulton if the chief could have made an exception.
"Anybody that's not in the city of South Fulton, it's a service we offer, either they accept it or they don't," Mayor David Crocker said.
Friends and neighbors said it's a cruel and dangerous city policy but the Cranicks don't blame the firefighters themselves. They blame the people in charge.
"They're doing their job," Paulette Cranick said of the firefighters. "They're doing what they are told to do. It's not their fault."
To give you an idea of just how intense the feelings got in this situation, soon after the fire department returned to the station, the Obion County Sheriff's Department said someone went there and assaulted one of the firefighters.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by H.W."Butch" Clor on
-
I've spoken on this before, like it or not in the fire service we are obligated to obey the orders of our superiors. Moral imperatives do apply to saving life, to property it is another matter. I've been an officer since 1992.
If you are a career officer, and directly disobey a superior. You will be in hack. If you respond outside your departmental limits to only protect property, directly against orders, like it or not when you get back to quarters, you will be off shift pending charges.
The fire commision will ask did you obey or disobey orders, not weather there was a moral imperative, to save the house. Either way, your, career and pension are now in a world of hurt, if not over.
The politicians frequently put the firefighter in a no win situation, this is one. The fire department crew did the right thing. Remember next to saving civilian lives, protecting our own is our first priority.
The Chief and Mayor are not shirking their responsibility, the ones who truly share the blame are the county commisioners who will not properly fund fire protection, sacraficing it on the altar of no new taxes; and the homeowner for being to lazy, cheap, or negligent to pay the fee!!
-
Permalink Reply by Fireslayer960 on
-
Well, that is kinda where I was going too. If indeed the chief is paid, then of course he would have to worry about his income. But if indeed the firefighters are volunteer, then they really have no viable excuse. Then it becomes a "setting an example" issue, and that I find pathetic. On a side note, I watched the video from the neighboring FD, and I was impressed by the way the chief would not "point fingers" or blame anyone, but yet he stated, they would have put the fire out and worried about billing later.
-
-
Brian, can you help us out on this? There seems to be some question as to whether South Fulton is a fully paid, combination, or volunteer department.
-
-
Right, I highly doubt that they would fire volunteers over it. Especially after paying to get them trained and certified. Although I would still hate to be put in that situation. Could you imagine, you chief is paid, so he HAS to follow some brain dead ruling by the council, but you are a volunteer, so they cant affect you financially, and your Chief HAS to give that order! Thankfully, our chief has stated, it would never happen, we would eliminate the danger, and worry about money later.
-
Permalink Reply by Brian Davis on
-
sffd is a combo dept
paid chief 3 ff
-
-
I dont think I am. To me, the big picture is letting someones home burn down over $75. Not to mention, being an animal lover myself, the thought of losing my dog or my cats because of someones total lack of compassion. Although, I think it was the dumbass homeowners fault to not remove his animals from harms way once he saw the fire leading to his house. I mean really, lets be honest here. You saw the report, you saw where the homeowner said he had his checkbook and told the chief he would pay ANYTHING, you heard that the neighbor stated, he would pay, to put the home out, but yet this chief stood back and did nothing. I dont believe that for one second, the city would have fired anyone if the chief had gone back after the fire was extinguished and said, yes, we put it out, but we charged him $2,000 for doing it. BUT, in all fairness to that Chief, I had also read that he had been written up just two weeks prior to this incident for doing exactly that, extinguishing a non-paying victims home. And to make their point hit home with all of the free-loaders, they could have told the local newspaper, HEADLINE: Homeowner charged $2,000 when his property caught fire because he didnt pay his $75 subscription!
-
Permalink Reply by Art "ChiefReason" Goodrich on
-
First of all; in the very first release of information, it was stated that everyone including pets were out of the house. Plus, it is documented that the residents FOUGHT the fire for thirty minutes BEFORE they called for assistance.
So, if animals were lost, then shame on the residents. The animals, if they died, is NOT the fault of the fire department.
The story coming from the Cranicks have changed with every new interview.
Plus, the only paid department in Obion County is Union City. The rest are "other than paid".
It doesn't matter. If a policy is in place that says that you do not provide service if the subscription has not been paid, then that is the policy in force.
Volunteers can't be fired?
Guess again.
The fact that they receive no pay has nothing to do with it. There is still liability and work comp issues and volunteers are indeed "employees" in that regard.
Just because you volunteer does not mean that you cannot be terminated from a fire department for violations of policies.
You may not lose income, but you may very well lose something that you hold dear.
Where would the IAFF be if members didn't follow their leaders?
What would you expect to get from the union if you didn't pay your dues?
As a homeowner, what can you expect for fire protection if you don't pay for it?
And since the IAFF doesn't have to deal with the subscription fee issue, what right does the international president have to weigh in on it?
Chew on that for a while.
-
-
I said that the loss of pets was the dumbass homeowners fault. And I never said that Volunteers couldnt be fired.
As far as the IAFF statement, if you go back to my post about it, I was simply quoting that the president of the IAFF did in fact not agree with the "Let it burn" approach. And posted his quote word for word to verify what I had said earlier.
But you do bring up a good point here Chief. I wonder what the union would have done, had these firefighters been terminated for saving that house? That is, if they were in the union, which I doubt being Volunteer.
But to say, the fact that they receive no pay has nothing to do with it? I disagree, it has alot to do with it. If indeed these guys were looking at destroying their career, their income, their retirement, then the fact of them just standing there watching would take on a whole different perspective.
One other point, "The residents fought this fire themselves for 30 minutes" Doesnt that bring up the debate on "Threat to life"? Boy, could you imagine THAT headline? Man dies trying to save home that firefighters refuse to extinguish.
I am not trying to shift blame here, the home owner is an idiot, he should have paid,PERIOD. But, when there is a fire, WE EXTINGUISH IT!
-
Permalink Reply by Conrad M on
-
I thought the days of the fire seal were gone (pic)
but once again just when you think you've seen it all. Services like fire, police, etc are essential to society and should not be treated like utilities (gas, power, water) as Fire is in this case (and globally)
If human lives had been lost I think someone would have a lot of explaining to do. Understanding that fire services seems to be the one foundation that government can never fully subsidize especially when you have men and women clambering to do it for free or next to nothing, and now have become the First Response team in virtually every emergency known to man. But then again $75 bucks can get you a few beers and some wings on Friday night...
-
Permalink Reply by Station10Capt106 on
-
alot of people seem to be focusing on the $75 subscription fee and just saying that why not put it out and just charge them double. To me this isn't about the amount of the fee. It could be $5 or it could be $5,000. It is still the same situation.
The facts have been spelled out multiple times.
1) Obion does not have a fire dept.
2) Obion does not have any tax base to support a fire dept
3) a neighboring dept (with no fiduciary resposibility to act in the area) has offered fire suppression through a subscription service
4) South Fulton F.D. was following their orders (not freelancing & going against their superiors)
5) homeowner knew about this service and intentionally refused to pay
6) homeowner stated that he knew he didn't pay but figured they'd come anyways
7) homeowner gambled that it would never happen to him and lost
Like it or not (and I would say all firefighters don't like to just watch a house burn and not try to help) there was nothing they could do in this situation. The fault lies within the county & residents that do not provide secured funding through a tax base to provide fire service. If everyone waited to pay until after the fire happened how would the fire dept be able to fund and maintain their trucks & equipment? I would like to pay for all my insurance after I have an accident or get sick, but if I don't then I know that I can't expect them to help me out. Now if funding is tax based then even if the resident didn't pay their taxes there would be the duty to act because sooner or later there will be a tax sale that will pay for the accruing deliqency.
-
Permalink Reply by Robert jacobs on
-
Well thats it I think Im done with this topic I suppose I will never understand how it works down there,I know the rank and file guys cant break orders I was trying to point out and I thought I did is that I was upset with the chief who said sorry cant help you, he listened to a man asked for help when his men were allready there,allready throwing water Im sorry I cant understand that,to me its just that simple he didnt help.Would the Mayor of that city really fire his chief for helping someone when his allready there... who knows,Im sure someone here will come up with somthing say..but hey lets keep wearing our job shirts around town so people know what we do,put the cool "We fight what you fear"or what ever stickers on your trucks,and take a plate of cookies on 9/11 for being a Firefighter...
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
And since the IAFF doesn't have to deal with the subscription fee issue, what right does the international president have to weigh in on it?
You're right Art, he doesn't have to deal with the issue, but the statement was in regards to such policies that would force such a hand as this where a policy can determine whether a person gets fire protection or not.
Basically, the IAFF statement was against such subscriptions policies and that political leaders shouldn't make such policies that would put FF's in such a predicament as we see here.
I mean really, just look at the number of knee jerk replies and so forth just from other FF's who are bashing these guys here, let alone the comments I could only imagine from those who don't have a clue about the job, let alone such policy. It is not the fault of the FFs here, they were following orders, but it is because of the set subscription policy which also forced those orders to be made.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
