Services NOT rendered

Services NOT rendered (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

joether -> Services NOT rendered (11/12/2013 1:40:01 PM)
This has come up all over the news reports within the last 24 hours. Given other news event I can see why it didn't get posted yesterday. A man named Justin Purcell in Arizona had his house burned down while he and his wife were away. The insurance would pay for the damages which is fine, but wont pay for the fire fighting services rendered. That's right, a private fire fighting company showed up and attempted to put the fire out. After it burned to the ground they sent a $20,000 bill to Mr. Purcell for 'services and equipment' rendered on the date. SOURCE In Business 101, if I do not ask for a service, but it is rendered to me, I am NOT forced to pay the bill. If the house was saved for the most part and could be repaired, that would be one thing. But burned to the ground? There is an expectation that what is being charged was fair and honest on a bill. They were not called up by the home owner, did not save the house on any level, but feel its within their right to charge the home owner for 'services rendered'. Would you pay this bill if you were in Mr. Purcell's shoes right now?

RottenJohnny -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/12/2013 1:44:45 PM)
I didn't read the article but I'm guessing it will probably depend if the private fire fighting company is under contract to the township they live in. Nevertheless, if it were me, I'd fight paying the bill too.

EdBowie -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/12/2013 1:54:59 PM)
If he bought a house where fire services were scarce, the mortgage or insurance company probably had him sign up for supplemental services. The sticking point seems to be that when he paid the $500 fee to join, he thought that was all there was to it.

MsMJAY -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/12/2013 3:07:48 PM)
Another source The bill was itemized. "$1,500 a truck," said Purcell. The bill shows one truck stayed on scene for six hours, a second truck was there for four. Each truck included three firefighters. "I think they were paying the firefighters $150 an hour and there were several of them," We asked to look at the mutual aid agreement, but we're told there isn't one in writing. "We do have what I call a gentleman's agreement," said Williams. (Public Info. Officer for Rural Metro Fire) Volunteer firefighters were on the scene within 13 minutes. It took Rural Metro 24 minutes to get there. residents were skeptical that Rural Metro, who just filed for bankruptcy, was trying to make a buck Based on all the above I would write them a check for "Go to hell" with a bonus of "kiss my ass."

EdBowie -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/12/2013 3:40:12 PM)
Suuuuure you would. Do you renege on all your contracts? quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY Another source The bill was itemized. "$1,500 a truck," said Purcell. The bill shows one truck stayed on scene for six hours, a second truck was there for four. Each truck included three firefighters. "I think they were paying the firefighters $150 an hour and there were several of them," We asked to look at the mutual aid agreement, but we're told there isn't one in writing. "We do have what I call a gentleman's agreement," said Williams. (Public Info. Officer for Rural Metro Fire) Volunteer firefighters were on the scene within 13 minutes. It took Rural Metro 24 minutes to get there. residents were skeptical that Rural Metro, who just filed for bankruptcy, was trying to make a buck Based on all the above I would write them a check for "Go to hell" with a bonus of "kiss my ass."

DomKen -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/12/2013 3:41:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie If he bought a house where fire services were scarce, the mortgage or insurance company probably had him sign up for supplemental services. The sticking point seems to be that when he paid the $500 fee to join, he thought that was all there was to it. The article linked to in the op article indicates he did not pay a $500 subscription fee but that the for profit FD sent around letters soliciting it after this guy's fire. I cannot begin to see how a company can simply show up and not fight a fire and then send the guy who lost his house a bill.

Phydeaux -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/12/2013 5:53:49 PM)
Not really a new story. Non volunteer fire fighters are doing the same thing. Checking if fire dept fees are paid before fighting the fire. Same state in fact.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/12/2013 7:53:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether This has come up all over the news reports within the last 24 hours. Given other news event I can see why it didn't get posted yesterday. A man named Justin Purcell in Arizona had his house burned down while he and his wife were away. The insurance would pay for the damages which is fine, but wont pay for the fire fighting services rendered. That's right, a private fire fighting company showed up and attempted to put the fire out. After it burned to the ground they sent a $20,000 bill to Mr. Purcell for 'services and equipment' rendered on the date. SOURCE In Business 101, if I do not ask for a service, but it is rendered to me, I am NOT forced to pay the bill. If the house was saved for the most part and could be repaired, that would be one thing. But burned to the ground? There is an expectation that what is being charged was fair and honest on a bill. They were not called up by the home owner, did not save the house on any level, but feel its within their right to charge the home owner for 'services rendered'. Would you pay this bill if you were in Mr. Purcell's shoes right now? With just what has been written on the thread before my post, I'd have to say that the for-profit Fire Department shouldn't hold their breath if it was me. There is no telling what the FD did, what expenses they bore, or what a realistic successful fight would have been. You claim that services were not rendered, but how do you know? What started the blaze may have had more to do with the final condition of the house than the services (or lack of services) rendered.

MsMJAY -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/12/2013 10:10:11 PM)
What contract? That's the point. The private Fire Department did not have a contract. They claim they had a "gentleman's agreement" whatever that means. If they are not business minded enough to even have anything in writing from the homeowners or the local government, I fail to see how they can claim ANY legal right to payment. quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie Suuuuure you would. Do you renege on all your contracts? quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY Another source The bill was itemized. "$1,500 a truck," said Purcell. The bill shows one truck stayed on scene for six hours, a second truck was there for four. Each truck included three firefighters. "I think they were paying the firefighters $150 an hour and there were several of them," We asked to look at the mutual aid agreement, but we're told there isn't one in writing. "We do have what I call a gentleman's agreement," said Williams. (Public Info. Officer for Rural Metro Fire) Volunteer firefighters were on the scene within 13 minutes. It took Rural Metro 24 minutes to get there. residents were skeptical that Rural Metro, who just filed for bankruptcy, was trying to make a buck Based on all the above I would write them a check for "Go to hell" with a bonus of "kiss my ass."

EdBowie -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/13/2013 4:33:14 AM)
Then how did he get homeowners insurance if the nearest volunteer squad was 15 minutes away? I suspect there's a little bit more to the story than first reports. quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY What contract? That's the point. The private Fire Department did not have a contract. They claim they had a "gentleman's agreement" whatever that means. If they are not business minded enough to even have anything in writing from the homeowners or the local government, I fail to see how they can claim ANY legal right to payment. quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie Suuuuure you would. Do you renege on all your contracts? quote: ORIGINAL: MsMJAY Another source The bill was itemized. "$1,500 a truck," said Purcell. The bill shows one truck stayed on scene for six hours, a second truck was there for four. Each truck included three firefighters. "I think they were paying the firefighters $150 an hour and there were several of them," We asked to look at the mutual aid agreement, but we're told there isn't one in writing. "We do have what I call a gentleman's agreement," said Williams. (Public Info. Officer for Rural Metro Fire) Volunteer firefighters were on the scene within 13 minutes. It took Rural Metro 24 minutes to get there. residents were skeptical that Rural Metro, who just filed for bankruptcy, was trying to make a buck Based on all the above I would write them a check for "Go to hell" with a bonus of "kiss my ass."

joether -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/13/2013 4:39:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie Then how did he get homeowners insurance if the nearest volunteer squad was 15 minutes away? I suspect there's a little bit more to the story than first reports. From what I gathered in various news reports on different sites, is that the home owner had homeowner's insurance. But that the insurance did not cover fire fighting costs. I believe the link I placed in the original post states that as well. Why it doesn't include this cost I do not know.

Zonie63 -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/13/2013 5:54:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether Would you pay this bill if you were in Mr. Purcell's shoes right now? I'd probably fight it, although it's also something I would have considered before moving into a remote area with no fire coverage. I am a bit surprised that Rural-Metro had nothing in writing and called it a "gentleman's agreement." I wonder if that will hold up in court.

MsMJAY -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/13/2013 6:24:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether quote: ORIGINAL: EdBowie Then how did he get homeowners insurance if the nearest volunteer squad was 15 minutes away? I suspect there's a little bit more to the story than first reports. From what I gathered in various news reports on different sites, is that the home owner had homeowner's insurance. But that the insurance did not cover fire fighting costs. I believe the link I placed in the original post states that as well. Why it doesn't include this cost I do not know. The volunteer fire department was only 7 minutes from their home. Being a rural area and volunteer firemen it may have taken them 13 minutes to get there; but that is still better than the private company that is 20 miles away from their home. The couple paid taxes that fund the volunteer department in their area. I don't see how a private company 20 miles away can just show up, after the volunteer department, to a home they had never been contracted to service, and then send a bill this high. It sounds like some kind of a scam. Absent a contract or a court order I would not pay them $20,000.00

DarkSteven -> RE: Services NOT rendered (11/13/2013 6:32:11 AM)
The volunteer firefighters were there 11 minutes before Rural Metro showed up. Rural Metro charged for the volunteers - that sounds wonky. Especially since the homeowners already pay a tax that's supposed to fund volunteer FDs. That said, if I decide that you need a service and provide it, I cannot claim that a contractual agreement exists when I do. Plus, there is no way that Rural Metro didn't pad the bill. Six hours to put out a fire? Note the quote: "Those numbers are set based on 65 years on tradition buying equipment, training, operating a fire service," which did NOT state that the numbers are based on THEIR figures. In a major city, it makes sense to spend big bucks on equipment and operations. It sounds like Rural Metro bought a lot of expensive equipment on time, paid the top dogs salaries, and then declared BK to welsh on the equipment costs. Then they used numbers based on FDs that actually pay for their equipment, to justify massive billing. Barely legal fraud.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125