Quote:
Originally Posted by Drolefille
No shit he has to deal with the consequences. It's the idea of 'deserving' it and the acceptance of the situation that bothers me. This wasn't insurance, this was the fire department. It's considered a 'service' for a reason. I don't object to them paying for it, I object to the presentation of coverage as optional.
The situation never should have happened.
|
It's considered a service
for those who pay for it. He knew the consequences of living in the country and was OK with it. That falls on him. The fire department of
another city doesn't
owe him protection.
ETA: I would agree that it shouldn't have happened if the option to pay had gone into effect, say, earlier this year. I seem to remember reading, though, that this has been in effect since 1990. It's not as if they were blindsided by a mysterious fee. They were aware of the procedure for 20 years and still did nothing.