Fire Charges

[Hazmat206]

Why is it that companys get charged for false alarms when it's not always their fault, but when home owners do stupid things like leaving cooking unattended, leave ciggarette butts alight or leaving clothes near a heater they don't get charged?
I think they should introduce a bill where any fire that could of been prevented impose a fine to the OWNER. I believe currently the police issue fines to people who cause rubbish fires or unapproved burnoffs but, people still just think "it won't happen to me". if they're insured, their going to get a new house anyway, so they should be liable for the cost of the MFS. Labour, fuel, gear and risking  their lives come at a price.
I know the SAMFS is government funded and we pay taxes, but people have to start taking the responsibilities of their mistakes.

[Pipster]

One could argue that every fire is preventable.  If we take that argument to a logical conclusion, we should charge for attendance at every fire....  :evil:

Pip

[Hazmat206]

not entirely,for example electrical fires can't always be prevented

[OMGWTF]

They can with decent wiring ;)


HAZMAT206 - i think the point is we dont charge for actual emergencies. where as a false alarm that could be caused by say, dust from workmen not isolating the system, is a preventable call.

Putting something on to cook and forgetting about it, although stupid, is not necessarily preventable.

[Zippy]

just use the Act of God clause and ta da, nothings preventable.

"My car was lit by youths, think thats an act of god cos that was a petrol guzzler!"

[bittenyakka]

What Is the current charging schedule for MFS? didn't it change recently to $100 for commercial and $50 for residential but i have heard of people complaining about bills of numerous hundreds of dollars?

[Cameron Yelland]

The reason the Fire Service does not charge for actual emergencies no matter how stupid is because if they did it may stop people calling in the event of an emergency, therefore causing more damage etc.

[RescueHazmat]

Why is it that companys get charged for false alarms when it's not always their fault, but when home owners do stupid things like leaving cooking unattended, leave ciggarette butts alight or leaving clothes near a heater they don't get charged?
I think they should introduce a bill where any fire that could of been prevented impose a fine to the OWNER. I believe currently the police issue fines to people who cause rubbish fires or unapproved burnoffs but, people still just think "it won't happen to me". if they're insured, their going to get a new house anyway, so they should be liable for the cost of the MFS. Labour, fuel, gear and risking  their lives come at a price.
I know the SAMFS is government funded and we pay taxes, but people have to start taking the responsibilities of their mistakes.

I totally disagree with you..

[6739264]

Why is it that companys get charged for false alarms when it's not always their fault, but when home owners do stupid things like leaving cooking unattended, leave ciggarette butts alight or leaving clothes near a heater they don't get charged?
I think they should introduce a bill where any fire that could of been prevented impose a fine to the OWNER. I believe currently the police issue fines to people who cause rubbish fires or unapproved burnoffs but, people still just think "it won't happen to me". if they're insured, their going to get a new house anyway, so they should be liable for the cost of the MFS. Labour, fuel, gear and risking  their lives come at a price.
I know the SAMFS is government funded and we pay taxes, but people have to start taking the responsibilities of their mistakes.

I totally disagree with you..

Haha, oddly enough so do I.

You may find, if you look into things further, that most times the Fire Service only charges where there is an obvious issue that the company hasn't followed up. Guests smoking in a non-smoking room? Charge 'em. The same zone actived 3 times in a night? Charge 'em! Often times you also have companies passing on "Fire Brigade Charges" to the consumer (Guests/Tenants) even though the Fire Service hasn't charged the company at all. Its a very dodgy area.

As for charging everyone, well, you go give Mavis that $400 bill for burning her milk. You bottom feeding scum.

[Hazmat206]

6739264, it's amazing how you write such aggressive letters at times and like to disagree with alot of people then abuse them.(not just on my topics). how about being a man you think you are and give some details of who you are or what you do rather than hiding away abusing people. you're not tough like you think. :wink:

[6739264]

6739264, it's amazing how you write such aggressive letters at times and like to disagree with alot of people then abuse them.(not just on my topics). how about being a man you think you are and give some details of who you are or what you do rather than hiding away abusing people. you're not tough like  :wink:as you think.

Wow... it almost sounds like an entirely different person posting... odd that.

I'll just stick to my guns here and hold my own opinion, Im terribly sorry that it happens to be different to yours. If you want to get into a discussion face to face, I'm more than happy to, oddly enough I'll still be saying the same thing and calling you the same NASTY names. See you at the local!

[Hazmat206]

i agree with the point you made cameron, i guess there's two sides to every coin!

[Hazmat206]

I don't have a problem with you having different opinions, just the way you go about being so harsh on what people think. people don't have gos at you just because they disagree with you

[6739264]

I don't have a problem with you having different opinions, just the way you go about being so harsh on what people think. people don't have gos at you just because they disagree with you

I can give you a cuddle if you want HazmatHero, I really don't mean to offend you, but it just happens to be my manner. Is that such a terrible thing? I happen to think that is far more than offensive for you to propose that you charge people for every fire that could have been prevented. You should know very well that areas of low socioeconomic standing are over represented in fire statistics. So you would like to slug those who can least afford it with large sums of money for calling out a service that is there to serve them in their time of need?

"Screw the fact that you have lost your house and all of your worldly possessions, but by the way, you owe us $500 for putting your house out"

And just quietly, I like your fishing - It gives me something to do while I can't sleep :)

[chook]

I have to agree with Numbers, people should not pay regardless of how stupid they are. Except for numerous false alarms (making the owner pay tends to focus the mind a bit on getting the problem fixed). I'm not sure if you have heard Hazmat but your equipment, fuel & wages are paid for by ESL so I'm not sure why you would want to double dip anyway. I also noticed you only refer to SAMFS, if I was to take your idea further then it would have to cover the dickheads who let burnoffs get out hand & the morons who drive their car pissed and the prang it!
Anyway good luck with it all cheers

[tft]

The reason the Fire Service does not charge for actual emergencies no matter how stupid is because if they did it may stop people calling in the event of an emergency, therefore causing more damage etc.

On the money, they did this in USA in some places. Started to charge people for fire trucks if you had a fire. So what happened was the public were not calling the fire service, which in the long runs cost more money and was dangerous to the public.

[6739264]

To clarify, I have no issue with charging businesses for alarm activations that are preventable, but certainly not in the first instance. If they have a faulty detector and its fixed, no problem. If they have a faulty detector, refuse to fix it and we keep getting called, then THAT should attract a charge.

[RescueHazmat]

6739264, it's amazing how you write such aggressive letters at times and like to disagree with alot of people then abuse them.(not just on my topics). how about being a man you think you are and give some details of who you are or what you do rather than hiding away abusing people. you're not tough like you think. :wink:

Cause your signature tells everyone who you are?

[chook]

And for some who want to remain in the service but keep their own opinion it would not be healthy to let people know who you are  :wink:
Where as I made sure people knew what my opinion on service matters were before going into a public space with it.
However others have been kicked fairly hard for expressing opinions on this site that are different to the official service opinion - remember Code of Conduct?
And I would think being in a paid service it would be more hazardous to your career if they know who you are?
Hazmat those who know better let Numbers barbs just pass right on through & don't worry about it, if I worried about every comment he made that was "harsh" I would be a cot case by now :-D. And obviously you have met Boardy yet :wink: ha make Numbers look like a pussy cat!
cheers

[6739264]

Meow ;)

Honestly, I'm just sick of the way CFS/MFS/SES operates when you have discussions.

You can't hold an opinion without it being tied to your Brigade/Service/Unit.

Its nothing about being a tough guy, I just like to have discussions where its the ideas that are being discussed, rather than anything to do with the individual.

[OMGWTF]

And I would think being in a paid service it would be more hazardous to your career if they know who you are?

Judging by the questions and comments we have read from Hazmat206 [and the name...] i honestly wouldnt think this would be a problem for him/her.

[chook]

Totally agree Numbers, you & I might not always see eye to eye but at least you can put up a reasonable arguement to back you case.
cheers

[6739264]

Totally agree Numbers, you & I might not always see eye to eye but at least you can put up a reasonable arguement to back you case.
cheers

What would you know anyway? You're SES through and through, go grow some Rice! :P

Mate you're the same, good argumments and good points. I think we agree on what needs to happen eventually... just getting there is where we differ :)

[chook]

Sadly the rice crop is looking a bit sad this year - again!
Took a trip up into the Snowy's on the weekend and the storages a lookin pretty bad. Good news is we have heaps of Citrus :-D
Anyway good to catch up cheers