[alex028502]

There must be a price that the fire department could theoretically charge if they were gonna always charge on the spot, and still make a profit, as long as there is some minimum number of fires.

Also it says that this TN guy had insurance. I wonder if it would have been worth his insurance company's while to make sure that $75 was always paid, either by paying it themselves, or making him pay it, or paying it and sending him the bill, and somehow making it a condition.. to protect themselves from having to pay out... as the London article is about insurance companies starting fire brigades themselves for that very reason

[fatbird]

The FD had tried retroactively charging for fire services, but then spent more on collections than they'd collect. People living in the unincorporated part of the county were usually trying to pay as little as possible for anything. Three times they voted down taxes to fund fire services generally.

Not to mention the question of duress when the FD shows up and says "sign this and we'll put out the fire."

[systems_glitch]

Don't know how it works there, but the bank through which we have our home loan requires insurance, payment of property taxes, etc. and to ensure all that actually happens it's done through an escrow account. We pay one bill to the bank every month, they handle the rest. Seems like a solid way to make sure these kinda things don't happen, and then we can't forget something like the property tax, which happens every six months.

Back on the farm, which is 30 minutes from the nearest fire brigade, one does have to pay to opt-in for fire service. They still answer the phone if you're not on the list. You're also strongly encouraged to have a pond or cistern near anything you want saved. I don't know if the farm's mortgage required payment of that fee, but I do know we were given insurance discounts for having ponds near the houses and barn.

I do know of one case of a particularly belligerent property owner who refused to pay, had fires, still wouldn't pay, etc. who did eventually wind up with firefighters watching his property burn. Hard to really feel bad about something like that.

[ghufran_syed]

How would you deal with the credit risk? or are you assuming that the homeowner has arbitrary amounts of cash, at hand, but somehow not in the burning house?

[FinnKuhn]

I guess they have a house wich could account for some of that credit risk?

[jahewson]

Not once it's on fire.

[lolinder]

A house that now requires tens of thousands of dollars of repairs.

[FinnKuhn]

the house sits on some land though, which I assume is probably worth at least enough to pay for the fire fighter though.

[asddubs]

sounds like a good way to encourage arson