[evolved_rage]

They should modify the rules. The Fireman should put out all fires, but treat the $25 bucks as a fire permit. Those fires that don't have a permit in advance, pay for the firefighting, some hourly rate, plus equip rental and materials and a fine... Pay $25 in advance, or $thousands afterwards.

I wonder what the insurance company would think if they knew they intentionally did not pay the $25?

[fatboy]

Here is a link to the fire company that put the fire out the first time..http://www.ci.international-falls.mn.us/fireb.htm

The department is a "combination dept" meaning that there are full time "paid" fire fighters and the rest are volunteers. In my opinion, the tax payers of International Falls are paying for the salaries of the paid members. This and the other expenses of running the fire co are the reasons why the outlying areas are asked to pay a yearly fee.

The owner of this trailer is very lucky that they put the fire out the first time. Having seen a few trailer fires, I doubt there was much left of it before the re-kindle. I have never heard of a home owner re building a trailer that had a fire althought I'm sure it has been done, they just to flimsy to fix.

The home owner is a first class jerk and ingrate. His house was a total loss after the first fire, why should the fire co put out any effort when this guy is too cheap to throw the fire co $25.00 and the house was already gone? Some structure fires are loosers plain and simple. This house was a looser.

Tom

[camle]

if you put it the way you propose, one can play the odds and never pay - knowing the chances of his needing the service is relatively small - therefore why pay when you can get the service anyway? Revenue would drop as word got out.

but if service is needed, do you really think that a guy who wouldn't pony up 25 bucks will pay thousands? Especially when he has repair/replacement bills to contend with and little assets? so there would be little or no reimbursement.