This just makes me sick!

[Spookwriter]

I'm told that the $75.00 fee in this question has been in effect since
1990. The community voted down a levy to increase their property tax
to fund fire department coverage.

Sometimes saving a dollar is expensive.

Here, we have a levy on our property tax. Property owners pay, renters
benefit. But it works out.

Another site, someone from Alabama said that there is a $2.00 a month
charge added to their electric bill for fire department funding. Anyone here
from Alabama?

But the point that the community in question knowingly and willingly voted
against funding their fire department. Comes down to CHOICE.

If the levy came up again, would they maybe like to rethink that choice?
How would you vote?

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

I live less than a mile from the Alabama state line. On the calls I have ran with them I have never asked about funding for fear of coming across as bragging. Jackson being the biggest county in the state, they seem to do ok. They have plenty of FD buildings an dont seem to be doing without on trucks, though most are old as me. Parts of Al though are still sucking carpet though. Probably parts of most other states are too.

 

[chickened]

If a FF breaks the rules he can be sued for negligence and the rule would be not providing protection if they paid through the taxes and the 75.00 was a co-pay.
Failure to render assistance at an accident is a crime.
Quote:
http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2011/06/can-you-sue-a-paramedic-firefighter.html

 

[chickened]

Our property taxes pay for our Fire Protection District, not to replace the property. That would be covered under homeowners which may have paid for the cost of putting out the fire.

Quote:
Fire protection? Isn't that what home insurance is for? I pay my insurance premium plus the extra that they tack onto my taxes.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Quote:

TN law seems to say otherwise.

 

[chickened]

Tort Claims Acts (28 USC Section 2674) has basically repealed the old sovereign immunity that most government agencies had. This gave the public the ability to recover compensation for harm done by the government. Since this was national legislation it trumped the ability of the states to claim sovereign immunity.

To receive compensation under tort claims a party must first file a claim with the government. If the claim is denied then the person can file a suit against the governmental agency.

That said there is personal protection for firefighters operating on the job. Statutory immunity is designed to protect the department and individual firefighter against tort claims who is; a) working in an official capacity of the department, and b) operating within the policies and procedures of the department. There is also the 1997 Volunteer Protection Act which covers volunteer firefighters/EMS from tort claims.

All this said, there are many examples of parties suing firefighters. Either they were operating outside of the law and the department's policies and procedures or a blood sucking lawyer has pushed the issue with a sympathetic judge and they go to court. If the department has a policy or procedure that goes against national best practices, this also opens up the department for law suits.

Also, each state has their own law concerning statutory immunity. Each states law is worded differently and the coverage varies greatly.

There is a great text named "Legal Considerations for Fire and Emergency Services" by J. Curtis Varone.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Firemen are sued medical malpractice/negligence. Rather hard to win.

Firemen for not putting out a fire? I only know of one time that has ever been tried an they actually sued the department over the wording of there SOPs.


Your welcome to point me to a case where a firemen was sued for failure to put out a house.

 

[dainerra]

Quote:
http://blogs.findlaw.com/injured/2011/06/can-you-sue-a-paramedic-firefighter.html

But they DON'T pay through their taxes. The citizens of the town pay through their property taxes. Extending outside that area is an option that county residents can CHOOSE to pay for.

It was posted above by spook. The citizens were given the option to have the fee added to their taxes and voted no. The current rule has been in effect for 11 years.

So your scenario of not providing a service they paid for STILL doesn't fit. The people thought that saving $75 was great until their home burnt to the ground. NOW they think that it's unfair?

 

[chickened]

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/rss/s_470606.html

Found several cases of firemen filing discrimination suits, actually a lot of them.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Here is an interesting read for anyone that thinks firemen or police have some duty to protect you or save you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia

http://gunrightsalert.com/documents/Warren_v._District_of_Columbia_444_A_2d_1.pdf