Over the past few days, I've been conflicted over this whole FD issue. On the one hand, the man stated his son had a fire in the past, and although the son didn't pay his subscription, the FD still put it out and then sent him the bill. This man thought the same thing would happen. From what I've read, the FD has covered non-payers in the past, and then when they later tried to collect, the people wouldn't pay. Should the citizens who pay foot the bill for those non-payers? In a non-threatening situation, I'd say no. With this, however, it seems the negatives of letting the fire burn far outweigh anything they may have gained. Pets were in the house and died. What about the property values of those who live nearby?
I don't know that many firemen, but the few I know would want to make sure the fire was out and then worry about payment later. Couldn't the city send the bill, and then if the person doesn't pay, the city could sue for non-payment? I'm not really sure how that works.
Ultimately, though, I'm sad to hear about this whole sorry mess.