PDA

View Full Version : Looks Like Fire Marks still being used here in Tennessee!



Alexamateo
5th October 2010, 03:04
http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/news/local/Firefighters-watch-as-home-burns-to-the-ground-104052668.html


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...........

"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............

While I'm sympathetic, he refused to pay. Heck, I think $75 is a bargain. I live in unincorporated Shelby County, TN and I pay an additional $410 per year in fire protection. It's collected on my monthly utility bill. In order to not pay you have to willfully opt out.

Rollo
5th October 2010, 03:20
This is bloody stupid.
The fact that you can opt out is quite frankly pathetic.

If this was anywhere in the Commonwealth, there is duty of care with regards reasonableness as spelled out in Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Company (1856).
It is reasonable to expect that the fire brigade will make an effort to put out a fire. Under Common Law, a reasonable person failing to act falls under the grounds of negligence.

anthonyvop
5th October 2010, 03:47
oop

Alexamateo
5th October 2010, 05:24
If you're going to have a situation like this (fire protection for those outside the municipal boundary), a better policy would be to have thew costs laid out in advance. By that I mean the homeowners would pay a fee for fire protection as if they lived in the city like they do now, or if they chose not to pay, they would then pay for the response be it $5000 or $10,000. Then the firefighters would just respond and not worry if a property was covered or not. If someone couldn't pay, then the county would just take a lien against the property.

Tazio
5th October 2010, 05:48
This is bloody stupid.
The fact that you can opt out is quite frankly pathetic.

If this was anywhere in the Commonwealth, there is duty of care with regards reasonableness as spelled out in Blyth v Birmingham Waterworks Company (1856).
It is reasonable to expect that the fire brigade will make an effort to put out a fire. Under Common Law, a reasonable person failing to act falls under the grounds of negligence.

I totally agree with this. Having always lived in cities I never faced this dilemma. I'd pay the bucks up though. I just can't imagine letting this place burn. It should not be an option it should be a tax.

Easy Drifter
5th October 2010, 06:14
It is built into your Ppty taxes here. Further most Fire Depts. outside the major cities have reciprocal agreements with surrounding municipalities. Tay Twp. where I live has a deal with Tiny Twp., Town of Midland, Severn Twp. Georgian Bay Twp. and Oro-Medonte Twp. The City of Orillia has agreements with surrounding Twps. plus the Chippewas of Rama Dept. They have a large Dept. because of the Casino.
Even Barrie with a population of 130,000 has deals with surrounding Depts. including CFB Borden.
Years ago we were in the Town of Hanover when a large closed furniture factory burned on a bitterly cold Feb. night. 4 different Depts. fought the fire including an Aerial ladder truck that came from Owen Sound over 30 miles away. Not only that it was a totally open truck. Not even the cab was enclosed. It was about 20F below 0.