Mayor Bloomberg's Version of Merry Christmas!

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Oct 6, 2008
124,863
60,200
2,300
Brooklyn, NY
Attention New York City motorists: If you get into an accident and need the Fire Department to come to the rescue, expect a bill.

Facing serious budgetary constraints, Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration has decided to join a growing number of municipalities around the country that are charging motorists involved in accidents for emergency-response services.

This so-called "crash tax" or "accident tax" has left bill recipients in other places around the country outraged, and a number of states have banned the practice.

The FDNY plans to start sending out bills July 1. A vehicle fire or any other incident with injuries will cost $490. A vehicle fire without injuries will cost $415. And incidents without fire or injuries will cost $365. These charges apply to every vehicle involved in the incident.

The New York City Fire Department, the largest municipal fire department in the nation, "can no longer afford to provide" emergency services to motorists "at no cost to those who require them," a statement from the FDNY said.

New York City To Bill Motorists Who Crash and Need Aid - WSJ.com


Now, just stop those unnecessary accidents, hear!
 
sucks b/c suing the person who caused the accident wouldn't even be worth it with court fees etc. seems insane to charge someone who wasn't at fault.
 
sucks b/c suing the person who caused the accident wouldn't even be worth it with court fees etc. seems insane to charge someone who wasn't at fault.

I'm guessing that the Mayor-who-wants-to-be-President belives that the insurance company will pick up the "tax."
 
Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't this one step away from a Libertarian Utopian dream?

The only thing missing is private company first responders that would be compensated out of pocket instead of by the public coffers.
 
Attention New York City motorists: If you get into an accident and need the Fire Department to come to the rescue, expect a bill.

Facing serious budgetary constraints, Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration has decided to join a growing number of municipalities around the country that are charging motorists involved in accidents for emergency-response services.

This so-called "crash tax" or "accident tax" has left bill recipients in other places around the country outraged, and a number of states have banned the practice.

The FDNY plans to start sending out bills July 1. A vehicle fire or any other incident with injuries will cost $490. A vehicle fire without injuries will cost $415. And incidents without fire or injuries will cost $365. These charges apply to every vehicle involved in the incident.

The New York City Fire Department, the largest municipal fire department in the nation, "can no longer afford to provide" emergency services to motorists "at no cost to those who require them," a statement from the FDNY said.

New York City To Bill Motorists Who Crash and Need Aid - WSJ.com


Now, just stop those unnecessary accidents, hear!

Alternatively, he could just tax everyone...including all of those people who live in Brooklyn Heights who commute into Lower Manhattan via subway and who do not own a car.
 
Attention New York City motorists: If you get into an accident and need the Fire Department to come to the rescue, expect a bill.

Facing serious budgetary constraints, Mayor Michael Bloomberg's administration has decided to join a growing number of municipalities around the country that are charging motorists involved in accidents for emergency-response services.

This so-called "crash tax" or "accident tax" has left bill recipients in other places around the country outraged, and a number of states have banned the practice.

The FDNY plans to start sending out bills July 1. A vehicle fire or any other incident with injuries will cost $490. A vehicle fire without injuries will cost $415. And incidents without fire or injuries will cost $365. These charges apply to every vehicle involved in the incident.

The New York City Fire Department, the largest municipal fire department in the nation, "can no longer afford to provide" emergency services to motorists "at no cost to those who require them," a statement from the FDNY said.

New York City To Bill Motorists Who Crash and Need Aid - WSJ.com


Now, just stop those unnecessary accidents, hear!

OK, but where I live the volunteer fire dept is the first responder to all accidents and the only responder capable of administering first aid.

Our community is dissected by a major state highway hours from any city.

Without being able to charge fees for responses our voluntary fire dept would be forced via default to assume the costs as well as the effort, training etc, themselves.

80% of the fire dept's calls are traffic accidents. They provide this service free and at their own personal expense with no reimbursement from the county, state or fed government.

911 has no problem notifying the volunteers to summon themselves to the scene of an auto accident, but they provide almost no support or compensation after they do.

What is wrong with charging folks who have accidents for the services they consume?

These services don't just fall out of the sky. Somebody incurs expenses to provide them.

Do tow trucks show up to the scene of an accident without charging the auto owner for services rendered?
 
Towing services that often give kickbacks to first responders in big cities?

Around here towing services have monopolies. But if they won't respond for free why should a qualified first aid tech with jaws of life and a fire engine and rescue capacity show up free? Hell they do traffic control and everything free.

Their only recourse is to send a bill to the party who required emergency services.

I had a good friend fall off a cliff and break his leg, hip and arm doing a free rescue after an auto accident recently. He's the fire dept chief and himself and his dept would receive no compensation whatsoever if it wasn't their practice to bill for services after the fact.

Why should they provide this service at their own expense and personal risk if tow trucks won't?
 
So what happens if you have too many unpaid fire department bills? They say, "can't put out the fire at 1976 Boy George Ave, NYC, that dead beat owes for 4 false calls and one auto accident, burn baby burn!"

Next will be charging for police house calls. "Miss I understand your husband beat the crap out of you, we took him away, now here is you bill for $1000, we had to charge you extra because it was a holiday."
 
Towing services that often give kickbacks to first responders in big cities?

Around here towing services have monopolies. But if they won't respond for free why should a qualified first aid tech with jaws of life and a fire engine and rescue capacity show up free? Hell they do traffic control and everything free.

Their only recourse is to send a bill to the party who required emergency services.

I had a good friend fall off a cliff and break his leg, hip and arm doing a free rescue after an auto accident recently. He's the fire dept chief and himself and his dept would receive no compensation whatsoever if it wasn't their practice to bill for services after the fact.

Why should they provide this service at their own expense and personal risk if tow trucks won't?
Quite true, I was referring to an old "Dragnet" episode that recently aired in my area. LA and other cities issued special licenses as recently as the 60s to tow services and the show was about the investigation of an "outlaw" towing service to keep the patronage going. "On the Pad" an expose of corruption in NYC detailed the same sort of behavior there. Although far from all NYPD cops are crooks the crooks do or at least did aid each other's advancement through such payoffs.
 
So what happens if you have too many unpaid fire department bills? They say, "can't put out the fire at 1976 Boy George Ave, NYC, that dead beat owes for 4 false calls and one auto accident, burn baby burn!"

Next will be charging for police house calls. "Miss I understand your husband beat the crap out of you, we took him away, now here is you bill for $1000, we had to charge you extra because it was a holiday."

Fire districts began as self insurance coops and may return to that status once the nanny state declines.

If you have a fire today and damage occurs it is either insured or it isn't. What is wrong with buying insurance for services to put it out or respond to your personal emergency?

What is wrong with paying after the fact? Why should society, city, county, state etc pick up the tab for your insurance?
 
Towing services that often give kickbacks to first responders in big cities?

Around here towing services have monopolies. But if they won't respond for free why should a qualified first aid tech with jaws of life and a fire engine and rescue capacity show up free? Hell they do traffic control and everything free.

Their only recourse is to send a bill to the party who required emergency services.

I had a good friend fall off a cliff and break his leg, hip and arm doing a free rescue after an auto accident recently. He's the fire dept chief and himself and his dept would receive no compensation whatsoever if it wasn't their practice to bill for services after the fact.

Why should they provide this service at their own expense and personal risk if tow trucks won't?
Quite true, I was referring to an old "Dragnet" episode that recently aired in my area. LA and other cities issued special licenses as recently as the 60s to tow services and the show was about the investigation of an "outlaw" towing service to keep the patronage going. "On the Pad" an expose of corruption in NYC detailed the same sort of behavior there. Although far from all NYPD cops are crooks the crooks do or at least did aid each other's advancement through such payoffs.

I am sure it happens, tow companies often live or die via referrals or the lack thereof. But they don't respond for free. Should they?
 
sucks b/c suing the person who caused the accident wouldn't even be worth it with court fees etc. seems insane to charge someone who wasn't at fault.

I'm guessing that the Mayor-who-wants-to-be-President belives that the insurance company will pick up the "tax."
I think it's properly called a fee rather than a tax. And I don't know why insurance would not cover it -- unless the party at fault has no comprehensive coverage.
 

Forum List

Back
Top