Man's Home Burns Down While Firefighters Watch

I heard this on the radio up here, and I'm not even in the US. However, it was an insurance fee from what I heard, and the guy decided not to pay it. The neighbors house started to go up, and they had paid the fee, and their house was saved. This guy offered $500, but the firefighters said it was too late. If you are required to have renters insurance when you rent a house, what gives you the right to not pay insurance when you OWN a home?? I don't blame the firefighters, I blame the man who didn't pay it. If he had, then his home and pets would have been saved. He was clearly being selfish, $75/year isn't much when it comes to keeping your home, family and pets safe. No one will feel sorry for him or help him because it was his fault.

What? The firefighters hadn't done nothing to save the house, and the neighborhood? Because the fire might spread out to everywhere. That is not right, whether the guy pay that $75 or not, the firefighters job is to save the fire, contain the fire, and extinguish the fire. Not standing there and watch the whole incident happening.

It appears, on the surface, that some of America has returned to the Middle Ages and that the Huffington Post is uncharacteristically promoting the Liberal ethos. But is that really what the story is about? I do feel that there is definitely more to this story than meets the eye. There is something VERY fishy about the video report. For example, in the video, where were the distressed owners one usually sees? I have never seen a more composed and resigned couple interviewed on TV as the ashes of their home smouldered. Most people would be beside themselves with grief. These were not. Why were the dogs and the cat not rescued by the owners in the two hours before the fire reached the house? Very little, if anything, was said about that. If the resources of the city are so stretched, why did the fire trucks attend and simply stand around watching? Why were the film crew asked to leave when they asked awkward questions, yet the police never arrived to make them do so? Resources too stretched, perhaps? We did see a shot of a fire truck driving into a stubble field, while the voice-over said that they prevented the fire from spreading to a neighbour's property (but no shot of the fire actually spreading). A lot of questions, I know, but the news report video was so remarkably phoney, the more I think about it. The Huffington Post is quite a clever site and many of its stories seem to be twisted in some way to make an apparently straightforward news story take on a completely different message. This story was very definitely NOT just about the non-payment of $75. There was MUCH more behind it!

I saw that on the news last night and think it's disgusting...why didn't they help out and charge him later? What a waste of a home and now a family is homeless because of an oversight.

me too Bd I would not ever want to live in Tennessee after reading that. for a lousy 75 dollars they just sood by and let the mans house and pets burn down. They should be ashamed of themselves for what they did and should be repremanded for their callous behavior towards the man. I have heard a lot of Tennessee people are sort of hilly billyish but this is horrible thinking. letting a man lose his home and his pets also.

There's more to this. It took 2 hours for the fire to get from the barrels to the house. Why didn't he do more to try to put out the very slow moving fire? In 2 hours why didn't he think to let his animals out? He had well over 2 hours to do it. If I thought fire might get my house, Id save the animals before anything else. I'd get them out even before I called for help.

I saw it on Fox News last night. I do think that if he had forgotten to pay the fee, they should have sent him a notice saying "Your fee to pay firefighters to save your house is due in about ----days. If you have already paid, please disregard this notice." So when I checked the link, I did not see a rebuttal from the firehouse saying that they already sent him so many notices. Also it says he did not accept, which is different from forgetting to pay the fee. But anyway, if they did send notices to remind him, it would prove that his house burnt down because he forget. But if they did not send notices to remind him, it would prove that he refused to pay the fee. So I am waiting for more developments on this story.

i also heard this on the news (yes, it made the news here in southern ontario canada where i live!) and i thought is was just as nuts as you did. they hosed the neighbours house down because he HAD paid the 75 but let the mans house burn. how sad our world is becomming.

There is nothing fishy about this story. It's on all the local news chanels and the internet. The man forgot to pay the fee. The firemen refused to put out the fire. They were only there because the neighbor, who had paid his fee, called to protect his own home. They just stood there and watch the man's home and all his possesions go up in flames. It's shameful and disgraceful bahavior on the part of the firemen. They could have put the fire out and charged him for it, rather than treat it the way they did. I didn't think something like this could happen in America.

Seriously?! That's horrible. I never thought that you have to pay a fee in order for firefighters to help you with fires. I've always thought that's something that you get for free for because you're a resident of a certain place.

They just stood there doing nothing? But isn't it in some fireman's code of ethics to save people and other living things if there is a fire? It is such a shame that firemen are not holding on to their duties. They could have at least saved the guy and asked him for the money after saving him. That's outrageous!