No Response
As the old saying goes, “what if you gave a party and nobody came?” Well, what if you had a fire and nobody came? Sounds incredible but it happens.
For instance, take the Fresno, Texas homeowner whose 3,800 square foot home recently burned to the ground because volunteers failed to respond. KTRK-TV Houston recently reported the incident where although all pagers were working, the department’s Chief could not explain the absence of every single member.
Is there liability in this situation? The homeowner’s insurance company will most certainly cover the loss, but will that insurer have a right of subrogation against the volunteer department or the city if those operations are funded by the homeowner’s tax dollars?
We’re not talking here about delayed response times due to budget cuts (which seems to be a rising trend). Can the public expect a timely volunteer fire and emergency services response in exchange for its tax dollars?
An Alabama case, Hollis v. City of Brighton, 885 S.2d 135 (2004) addressed that issue. Plaintiffs who lost their home to a fire alleged that the City of Brighton established a duty and therefore liability by creating a volunteer department then consisting of nine members with three apparatus. The Supreme Court found no liability by distinguishing the performance expected of career firefighters to those of volunteers saying, “(B)ecause, in creating a volunteer fire department, a city is relegated to the vagaries of volunteer manpower, the undertaking by the city is too indistinct to support a legally enforceable duty to provide skillful fire protection.”
