When forgetting to pay a bill can have tragic consequences.
Discussion
msnbc said:
No pay, no spray: Firefighters let home burn
Tennessee house in ashes after homeowner 'forgot' to pay $75 fee
Firefighters in rural Tennessee let a home burn to the ground last week because the homeowner hadn't paid a $75 fee.
Gene Cranick of Obion County and his family lost all of their possessions in the Sept. 29 fire, along with three dogs and a cat.
"They could have been saved if they had put water on it, but they didn't do it," Cranick told MSNBC's Keith Olbermann.
The fire started when the Cranicks' grandson was burning trash near the family home. As it grew out of control, the Cranicks called 911, but the fire department from the nearby city of South Fulton would not respond.
"We wasn't on their list," he said the operators told him.
Cranick, who lives outside the city limits, admits he "forgot" to pay the annual $75 fee. The county does not have a county-wide firefighting service, but South Fulton offers fire coverage to rural residents for a fee.
Cranick says he told the operator he would pay whatever is necessary to have the fire put out.
His offer wasn't accepted, he said.
The fire fee policy dates back 20 or so years.
"Anybody that's not inside the city limits of South Fulton, it's a service we offer. Either they accept it or they don't," said South Fulton Mayor David Crocker.
The fire department's decision to let the home burn was "incredibly irresponsible," said the president of an association representing firefighters.
"Professional, career firefighters shouldn’t be forced to check a list before running out the door to see which homeowners have paid up," Harold Schatisberger, International Association of Fire Fighters president, said in a statement. "They get in their trucks and go."
Firefighters did eventually show up, but only to fight the fire on the neighboring property, whose owner had paid the fee.
"They put water out on the fence line out here. They never said nothing to me. Never acknowledged. They stood out here and watched it burn," Cranick said.
South Fulton's mayor said that the fire department can't let homeowners pay the fee on the spot, because the only people who would pay would be those whose homes are on fire.
Cranick, who is now living in a trailer on his property, says his insurance policy will help cover some of his lost home.
"Insurance is going to pay for what money I had on the policy, looks like. But like everything else, I didn't have enough."
After the blaze, South Fulton police arrested one of Cranick's sons, Timothy Allen Cranick, on an aggravated assault charge, according to WPSD-TV, an NBC station in Paducah, Ky.
Police told WPSD that the younger Cranick attacked Fire Chief David Wilds at the firehouse because he was upset his father's house was allowed to burn.
WPSD-TV reported that Wilds was treated and released.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39516346/ns/us_news-life/Tennessee house in ashes after homeowner 'forgot' to pay $75 fee
Firefighters in rural Tennessee let a home burn to the ground last week because the homeowner hadn't paid a $75 fee.
Gene Cranick of Obion County and his family lost all of their possessions in the Sept. 29 fire, along with three dogs and a cat.
"They could have been saved if they had put water on it, but they didn't do it," Cranick told MSNBC's Keith Olbermann.
The fire started when the Cranicks' grandson was burning trash near the family home. As it grew out of control, the Cranicks called 911, but the fire department from the nearby city of South Fulton would not respond.
"We wasn't on their list," he said the operators told him.
Cranick, who lives outside the city limits, admits he "forgot" to pay the annual $75 fee. The county does not have a county-wide firefighting service, but South Fulton offers fire coverage to rural residents for a fee.
Cranick says he told the operator he would pay whatever is necessary to have the fire put out.
His offer wasn't accepted, he said.
The fire fee policy dates back 20 or so years.
"Anybody that's not inside the city limits of South Fulton, it's a service we offer. Either they accept it or they don't," said South Fulton Mayor David Crocker.
The fire department's decision to let the home burn was "incredibly irresponsible," said the president of an association representing firefighters.
"Professional, career firefighters shouldn’t be forced to check a list before running out the door to see which homeowners have paid up," Harold Schatisberger, International Association of Fire Fighters president, said in a statement. "They get in their trucks and go."
Firefighters did eventually show up, but only to fight the fire on the neighboring property, whose owner had paid the fee.
"They put water out on the fence line out here. They never said nothing to me. Never acknowledged. They stood out here and watched it burn," Cranick said.
South Fulton's mayor said that the fire department can't let homeowners pay the fee on the spot, because the only people who would pay would be those whose homes are on fire.
Cranick, who is now living in a trailer on his property, says his insurance policy will help cover some of his lost home.
"Insurance is going to pay for what money I had on the policy, looks like. But like everything else, I didn't have enough."
After the blaze, South Fulton police arrested one of Cranick's sons, Timothy Allen Cranick, on an aggravated assault charge, according to WPSD-TV, an NBC station in Paducah, Ky.
Police told WPSD that the younger Cranick attacked Fire Chief David Wilds at the firehouse because he was upset his father's house was allowed to burn.
WPSD-TV reported that Wilds was treated and released.
130R said:
It's the same as insurance
Exactly.Pretty harsh, but he must have known that not paying would mean no service. If I knowingly had no home insurance, or no travel insurance etc and then found myself with a problem I wouldn't be looking for sympathy, as it's a risk one takes.
I feel sorry for the animals though, it's not their fault that their owner was irresponsible.
S1MMA said:
Should have paid the $75!
His own fault, his son can also get f
ked for attacking someone because his "pa" is a retard.
You know I don't really have a problem with things such as people who had their houses flooded not being covered because they had no insurance, or that type of "You forgot, on your own head be it" situation, but there is something a little wrong IMO with being prepared to watch someone's house and possessions burn to the ground because they forgot to pay their subscription to the fire service.His own fault, his son can also get f
ked for attacking someone because his "pa" is a retard.I still think it's a shame, as it's something we take for granted in this country.
Imagine you'd paid your tax late for whatever reason, and so the fire service didn't come to the rescue.
Yes, he took the risk, but I think it's unfortunate to be put in that position.
It's the same with their health service.
Imagine you'd paid your tax late for whatever reason, and so the fire service didn't come to the rescue.
Yes, he took the risk, but I think it's unfortunate to be put in that position.
It's the same with their health service.
paddyhasneeds said:
S1MMA said:
Should have paid the $75!
His own fault, his son can also get fked for attacking someone because his "pa" is a retard.
You know I don't really have a problem with things such as people who had their houses flooded not being covered because they had no insurance, or that type of "You forgot, on your own head be it" situation, but there is something a little wrong IMO with being prepared to watch someone's house and possessions burn to the ground because they forgot to pay their subscription to the fire service.His own fault, his son can also get f
ked for attacking someone because his "pa" is a retard.You cannot expect people to be responsible for themselves, as is the PH way, and then have no repercussions when it all goes wrong because someone was cutting a corner by not paying an entirely sensible bill.
paddyhasneeds said:
S1MMA said:
Should have paid the $75!
His own fault, his son can also get fked for attacking someone because his "pa" is a retard.
You know I don't really have a problem with things such as people who had their houses flooded not being covered because they had no insurance, or that type of "You forgot, on your own head be it" situation, but there is something a little wrong IMO with being prepared to watch someone's house and possessions burn to the ground because they forgot to pay their subscription to the fire service.His own fault, his son can also get f
ked for attacking someone because his "pa" is a retard.I feel for the loss of their pets lives, but unfortunately sometimes you need to stick by your guns. the moment they put out a fire for an owner that didn't pay the fee, would be the moment everyone knows they can take the piss.
TonyHetherington said:
T84 said:
Fair enough but 4 pets died, if the house was empty I'd have no sympathy.
Serious question - would firefighters risk their lives for pets anyway (fee paid or not?). I can't imagine they'd go into burning buildings for cats and guinea pigs?becksW said:
How can a 'lifesaver' stand by and watch this happen over $75 is beyond me.
I think it's becasue the fireman was told by his boss not to help. If he had helped then, as others have pointed out, it would undermine the system and then no one would pay their $75 because they knew they'd get free help if they needed it anyway. Hence the firemans boss could have sacked him, and so the fireman had no choice. I bet he felt awful about not being allowed to help, because it's in his nature to be a 'lifesaver' but his boss told him not to, else he'd be fired and then couldn't provide for his family.mrmr96 said:
becksW said:
How can a 'lifesaver' stand by and watch this happen over $75 is beyond me.
I think it's becasue the fireman was told by his boss not to help. If he had helped then, as others have pointed out, it would undermine the system and then no one would pay their $75 because they knew they'd get free help if they needed it anyway. Hence the firemans boss could have sacked him, and so the fireman had no choice. I bet he felt awful about not being allowed to help, because it's in his nature to be a 'lifesaver' but his boss told him not to, else he'd be fired and then couldn't provide for his family.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff