This just makes me sick!

[justuschickens59]

except such damages as may result from the gross negligence of the person rendering such emergency care.


I would think making a mistake and marking a person "unpaid" when they had paid, would fall under gross negligence.

Standing by and doing nothing due to critically dangerous conditions is one thing - standing by and doing nothing because they made a mistake and said you hadn't paid is quite another.

 

[dainerra]

The only problem with that tangent is that we don't know what the policy IS for those who say they have paid and the computer says "no". The people involved know that they did not pay and freely admit that they did not pay. So arguing "what if there was a records error" is like asking "what if aliens landed and poured gas on the fire"

If I lived there it would def be something I would ask.

 

[draye]

They need to do it like they did in our volunteer fire department (not!).
They keep putting it on the ballot and trying get get people to vote for it (remember this is suppose to be volunteer ), it failed to pass for about three years.

They then went to the county and had it added onto the real estate taxes (that was low down). What about the people that do not own their own property? Unfair it what it is.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Failure to act is not gross negligence. As they have said they will still rescue people that did not pay just not try to save there house which is what firemen are supposed to do. Firemen choose to try to save peoples stuff when it is safe to do so at there digression but its not a obligation. But then they have no obligation to save you ether...


The idea that people are trying to come up with reasons an ways to sue someone for failing to volunteer to do a dangerous job that they them selves also did not volunteer to do, just because the other person has volunteered to do that job before baffles me.

 

[dainerra]

Quote:
The "volunteer" part refers to the fact that the firemen don't get paid. They donate their time.

So does that mean that they should also buy their own firetrucks? Not many volunteers have a few hundred thousand $ to buy a firetruck.

Most property is owned by SOMEONE. So how is it unfair? I rent, so no I don't pay property taxes. But my landlord does and that is part of the costs he factored in when they decided how much rent to charge.

I do think that this post above illustrates why the city has the policy that they do.

 

[draye]

Quote:
The "volunteer" part refers to the fact that the firemen don't get paid. They donate their time.

So does that mean that they should also buy their own firetrucks? Not many volunteers have a few hundred thousand $ to buy a firetruck.

Most property is owned by SOMEONE. So how is it unfair? I rent, so no I don't pay property taxes. But my landlord does and that is part of the costs he factored in when they decided how much rent to charge.

I do think that this post above illustrates why the city has the policy that they do.

Yeah I know that the volunteer do not get paid, but my point is that the trucks and stuff are suppose to be kept up and maintained by the county right. That ias part of what we pay for in taxes anyway.

But if they insist on the people who live in these districts to pay for then everyonr should pay it regardless of whether or not they own property.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

No the county does not maintained volunteer departments unless the people of the community or the county seat votes that there tax money should do so. Many VFDs buy an maintain all there equipment out of pocket.

 

[justuschickens59]

Quote:
So if firemen, volunteer or paid, have no obligation to try to save people, no obligation to try to save personal possessions, and no obligation to try to save burning houses or businesses - what exactly is their purpose? To drive around in big cool trucks with sirens on, slide down poles, and play with big water hoses? What exactly does this fee cover then?

And I'm talking about trying to put out a fire and save a home - not going into a burning house to try to save personal possessions.

And for crying out loud, I'm certainly not sitting around trying to figure out a way to sue somebody. I'm 52 years old and have never yet filed a law suit against anybody. I'm asking a very legitimate question. Errors are made all the time. If a person pays to have a service provided, be it fire service or any other service, and said service, be it fire service or other service, is refused due to error, then that IS gross negligence.

My whole point is that it seems this system has some serious issues and needs to be looked at again.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

There job is to save lives when they can....


FYI a house is a personal possession.


The $75 is to pay for equipment an maintenance so it is there so they can use it to volunteer to try to save your life.

 

[justuschickens59]

Quote:
Some folks are just bound and determined to have tunnel vision. And thanks for the FYI - I would never have known that had you not informed me.

I have a dear friend who is a volunteer firefighter - according to him, part of his firefighter's code of ethics is "to safeguard lives and property"

As I stated before, I have utmost respect for firefighters, police, etc. None of my comments have been about the firefighters - but about the city/state laws that govern them.