Tuesday, October 05, 2010

Just a thought.

On balance.  I can see fire insurance doing more than simply covering the losses of the insured.

In other words, when there is a car accident there are insurance provisions that allow for towing and medical costs in addition to the collision costs of the car.

I can see a 'rider,' if you will, that could be mandated by State insurance agencies to be paid for along with the cost of the house insurance which would reimburse fire companies for their expenses when responding to a house / building fire, etc.

But, to simply allow homes to burn while leaving citizens homeless when a fire department could have prevented that, is the most inhumane idea I have ever heard.

If I am not mistaken I remember that dogs, cats and horses were killed due to a fire which was not responded to due to the owner being absent from 'the list.'  I believe that is cruelty to animals and those that did not respond should be held responsible.  Butning to death is NOT a humane end of an animals life.