Whingers.

I think that the North Sea storm surge of 1953 was even worse, but I agree with your point.

Yep.

Surely it ought to be his insurance company that should be helping him... (Not necessarily only financially).

Where theres blame.....

Nobody simply accepts anything anymore. Hardship of any sort will not be tolerated. Accidents should never happen, we should have access to every drug we might ever need, there should be no crime, tax should be low and the sun should always shine, except for the rain we need for stuff to grow which should fall at such a time that we are not inconvenienced.

Precisely.

Why people have the mentaility that some public sector organisation should be obliged to help them rather than their taking responsibility for themselves, never ceases to amaze me.

Just wait until your house is on fire.. I bet you want public services then.

Weatherlawyer wrote: [snip]

I rather think that phrase was coined a very long time ago. You merely borrowed it.

Blimey, did Tony forget to privatise the fire service?

You are as ever, far too astute for me.

I remain, ironically, yours. Mike.

Dennis,

Only to put the flames out and rescue and patch up any trapped persons - after that, it's up to your insurance company *or you* to sort out the repair works - and that's how it should be!

Brian G

John Hall wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@jhall.demon.co.uk.invalid:

If memory serves, it was a representative of Hereford & Worcester Fire & Rescue Service (no longer officially "Fire Brigade" it seems, despite holding on to the traditional title longer than many) who made the "worst in peacetime" comment, speaking specifically about the Hereford & Worcs area rather than the country as a whole.

Different issue.

Most of the people interviewed on the TV seem not to have any form of insurance. If they choose not to do that, then they should not expect to be bailed out (as it were) from the public purse.

I don't think so. There's plenty of private enterprise in the fire service. Window cleaning, painting and decorating,... all for cash of course.

Most of the SE expects to be bailed out using public money.. just look at how much flood control schemes like the Thames barrier costs.

I'll vote for that!

It doesn't work like that.. if there are fewer insured the same percentage gets paid but the costs are higher.. bigger rise in premiums.

What an asinine argument. The Thames barrier in case you hadn't noticed is a flood *prevention* scheme, the money isn't going to 'bail out' people who have been flooded, it's intended to prevent flooding in the first place!

So you buy a house on a flood plain and then want public money to stop it flooding.. even worse than expecting a payout if it gets flooded.

The message from David Buttery contains these words:

The message that this was the biggest post war disaster that the emergency services had had to deal with was abroad before the latest downpour when little more than Hull, Sheffiled and Doncaster were flooded. On the face of it they might be correct as the 1953 flood allegedly only affected 25000 homes while the prior total was already

What took the biscuit was the tv picture of some daft bitch begging for aid as she wasn't insured while throwing a childs bicycle into a skip because it had been in floodwater. Don't these morons know that things can be washed?