Mongo cut wood: The Troll is strong in this thread. (those defending the company)

Yes, because anyone who disagrees with you is a troll.

Kareeshus: Handsome B. Wonderful: Kareeshus: So bear in mind that this guy's gas bill could have doubled recently and he was either too poor or angry about it to pay.

Bear in mind your only source for this is your ass.

Yet Google turns up 618,000 hits for "Direct Energy Scam". I must have a big ass.

http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=direct+energy+scam&meta=&aq=f&oq=

I'm well aware that Direct Energy blows. Still, your only source for "this guy's gas bill could have doubled recently and he was either too poor or angry about it to pay" being the cause of this situation is still your ass.

Wait a minute.. I think *I* just got trolled.. dammit

James Vagabond: No silver bullet?

Other than Coors beer, the term "silver bullet" applies only to werewolves (or vampires, I forget which) and the Lone Ranger.

This has become confused with the term "magic bullet", which is a medical term for a treatment or drug that finds the tumor, or other malady, and improves it without side effects.

English ain't what it used to be, even idiomatic expressions are being misapplied.

Mongo cut wood: The Troll is strong in this thread. (those defending the company)

Why didn't you send any of the wood you cut to this guy? He could have burned it and stayed warm! It's all your fault, Mongo!

And don't try to use that "just pawn in game of life" excuse.

nastyboi: No Such Agency:

Reconnection fees are a screw job anyway. It's just another way the poor irresponsible deadbeats pay more for things than the rest of us do.

FTFY

Gas was cut off in June, he died in November. I wonder how much he spent on booze in that time period.

$37.41 US

I worked for a utility company in Ontario Canada a few years ago when energy prices rose considerably. The government stepped in to say that utlities could not be cut due to non-payment until some date late spring. Unfortunatly a large number of of households took that as "You don't need to pay anymore, and there's nothing they can do about it".

While a great PR move, this basically screwed us over. The utility was publically owned, so it didn't make money nor did it have extensive cash reserves. It also needed to pay for the gas, electricity, and basic infrastructure, that was now going to literally hundreds of un-paying homes.

Utility companies have bills to pay, summer and winter. If you can't get your act togethor over the summer to get your utilities re-connected it's time to look into a roommate, shelter, or alternate heating system.

Mongo cut wood: The Troll is strong in this thread. (those defending the company)

I find it very ironic that you have to qualify who the troll is.

OldScotch: Direct Energy is a poison company if there ever was one.

Avoid them like the plague.

/had to threaten to call the cops to get them to leave the last time they showed up with one of their "government enabled savings plan for your energy bills"

Did you try, oh, I don't know, closing your door before resorting to such threats?

GoodyearPimp: Jormungandr: Well, actually here in Edmonton (and Calgary) turning people's heat off in the winter will result in death. And gas companies won't do that. What I don't get is why they couldn't just put the bullshiat reconnection fee on the bill and worry about it later.

What time is winter in Calgary? Is it in June when his service was cut? Given that he was (just guessing since he had a $500+ bill) months overdue, sounds like they waited for a warmer month to finally cut service.

500$ could be as little as one month.
And you are right they did cut his service in the Summer. But when his mom paid the overdue balance in sept they did not reconnect him. When the mom paid did they neglect to tell her about getting it reconnected?

Mongo cut wood: The Troll is strong in this thread. (those defending the company)

The Parasite is strong in this thread

Inibrius: Lando Lincoln: Crosshair: They took 3 MONTHS to pay the bill. Then complain when it takes two months to reconnect the gas. Had they paid the bill right away the gas would have likely been back on in time for when it got cold. I am curious as to what the average time is for reconnect across the whole company. Is this length of time normal? How many calls were placed before the bill was paid and how many were after? Too many questions.

If she paid the bill on September 6, the gas should have been back on by September 13th. The gas company was losing money for every day that gas wasn't being used. There's no farking excuse for waiting two months to turn on a gas line, unless they weren't home for two months straight.

Read the whole article.

They paid the past due balance. They did NOT pay the ~$80 reconnection fee...so it didn't get reconnected.


Maybe you should try reading the article. At no point does it mention the dead guy didn't pay the reconnect fee. What the article DOES say, is that when the cops called to get heat in the house, the utility said "Gimme $$$".

Maybe the dead guy needed to pay a reconnect fee before they would restore service, but with the given article, we do not know.

No Such Agency: Reconnection fees are a screw job anyway. It's just another way the poorFarking Deadbeats pay more for things than the rest of us do.

Crosshair: No Such Agency: Reconnection fees are a screw job anyway. It's just another way the poor pay more for things than the rest of us do.

It costs the company money to send someone out there to reconnect the service. If you pay your bills and don't get disconnected, you don't have to pay that extra money. I see nothing unreasonable with reconnection fees as long as they are listed in the service contract.

I got charged a $30 service fee for gas and a $25 fee for water when I moved into my house. Both had never been turned off. The only thing they actually did was changed the name on the bill.

Oh yeah...the utilities companies know you have no choice.

Crosshair: They took 3 MONTHS to pay the bill. Then complain when it takes two months to reconnect the gas.

Can't go "Oh, they farked up, we can be farked up". That's ignorant.

Crosshair: I Said: Don't some companies keep it on under extreme circumstances?

Not in the middle of June.

I Said: And who cares if it's the man, the mother, or Santa Clause that pays it. It was paid and didn't go on for almost 2 months.

They took 3 MONTHS to pay the bill. Then complain when it takes two months to reconnect the gas. Had they paid the bill right away the gas would have likely been back on in time for when it got cold. I am curious as to what the average time is for reconnect across the whole company. Is this length of time normal? How many calls were placed before the bill was paid and how many were after? Too many questions.

I Said: This level of dickbaggery seems pretty clean cut.

Yes, the man for not paying his bills and the mans family not caring enough about him until he is dead, then they are looking for a payout.

If you don't want to pay reconnect fees then pay your bills. Turn the heat down to 50 degrees or something so your bills aren't that high.

It's quite simple. Pay your bills and your heat stays on. Utility companies exist to provide a service at a profit. The only person who has you best interest in mine is the person in the mirror.

If the man needed help there are organizations that can help, but you can't wait for them to come to you.

Of course, over here in Jolly Olde, it will never get turned off. The worst that will happen is that after a year or two a warrant will be sworn out and they will go in and install a prepayment meter, with the debt on the meter. Job sorted.

/works in energy industry
//don't hate me
\ these are low energy slashies
\\ 46% less tar

Or you could not be a deadbeat

Just wait for the 'Cap and Trade' policy hits. You'll see this more often.

Is there any legitimate reason to charge reconnection fees, or is it just another way to squeeze a little bit of extra money out of the people who can least afford it and have the least power to fight it?

On a related note, fark T-Mobile.

Jormungandr: I think what people are missing here is a farking "corporate policy" caused some guy's death.

No. Not True. Not at all. Some drunk who didn't pay his bills and was farking dumb enough to stay in the house when it was below freezing caused his own death.

the company COULD have maybe waived his reconnection fee, but this guy is not exactly a good customer.

But don't lay the blame on the gas company, no matter how much you hate them.

thomps: please elaborate.

Costs for energy companies will go up.

This will be passed on to consumers.

I always wonder why people keep stating that privatization of something causes the rates to become cheaper or the service improve, especially when it's basically a monopoly anyways.

I haven't seen a single instance in my entire life of the privatization of something actually improving service OR lowering prices. It has always in my experience lead to prices going up and service becoming worse.

wingnutx Quote 2009-04-24 01:37:20 PM
thomps: please elaborate.

Costs for energy companies will go up.

This will be passed on to consumers.

ZOMG! We should just let poor, unfortunate people die so your bill doesn't go up. They are probably just dumb, black, worthless drunks anyway!

Juc: I always wonder why people keep stating that privatization of something causes the rates to become cheaper or the service improve, especially when it's basically a monopoly anyways.

I haven't seen a single instance in my entire life of the privatization of something actually improving service OR lowering prices. It has always in my experience lead to prices going up and service becoming worse.

THIS. Public Utility Districts have cheaper rates in my state. Too bad I'm not living in one anymore...

/Portland General Electric sucks

Mongo cut wood: wingnutx Quote 2009-04-24 01:37:20 PM
thomps: please elaborate.

Costs for energy companies will go up.

This will be passed on to consumers.

ZOMG! We should just let poor, unfortunate people die so your bill doesn't go up. They are probably just dumb, black, worthless drunks anyway!

Sell the house and rent.

Buy blankets.

Light a fire. Firewood is free, and chopping the wood will keep you warm.

It isn't our responsibility to take pay for a deadbeat alcoholic to live a cozy life.

Oh, and your attempt to portrait anyone who doesn't wanna pay for someone else's inability to pay their bills as racist is retarded.

Mongo cut wood:

Complete non sequitur, gar gar gar

He asked for an elaboration on why cap/trade would generate more stories like this. I'm not sure what you think you are responding to.

Emposter: portrait

Portray.

Werehamster: Is there any legitimate reason to charge reconnection fees, or is it just another way to squeeze a little bit of extra money out of the people who can least afford it and have the least power to fight it?

It would seem to me that "because they're the worst farking customers" is a pretty legitimate reason.

Jormungandr: GoodyearPimp: I think everyone here doesn't understand the concept "gimme gimme gimme".

1. Give me gas service. I'll pay for it, or not, whenever I feel, or don't feel, like it.

2. Don't cut off my service, even if I haven't paid for it. It's my right to have service. Says so right in the Constitution (or whatever the Canucks use).

3. Even if I'm a bad customer, as soon as I pay my outstanding bill you should jump at the chance for me to go right back in the hole. It's the North American Way!



Well, actually here in Edmonton (and Calgary) turning people's heat off in the winter will result in death. And gas companies won't do that. What I don't get is why they couldn't just put the bullshiat reconnection fee on the bill and worry about it later.

Because he had a history of not paying his bills.

Where's the asinine tag?

Farking disgraceful. And that goes for all the farkers who are defending the gas company. If sombody does the deadbeat thing and doesn't pay for a few months, that doesn't mean that the company is in the clear to let the guy freeze to death over a few hundred dollars. If he was trapped in a in a hole or something or on the side of a mountain, "the people" would spend far more than a few hundred to get him out - just look at what trouble they went to to get a dumbass girl-child out of a hole over a decade ago. But when he owes money to a corp he deserves to die - nice social darwinism there...

Emposter: your attempt to portrait anyone who doesn't wanna pay for someone else's inability to pay their bills as racist

I'm pretty sure that Mongo is actually Janeane Garafalo.

Jormungandr

I think what people are missing here is a farking "corporate policy" caused some guy's death.

/facepalm

i8dbbq: Crosshair: I Said: Don't some companies keep it on under extreme circumstances?

Not in the middle of June.

I Said: And who cares if it's the man, the mother, or Santa Clause that pays it. It was paid and didn't go on for almost 2 months.

They took 3 MONTHS to pay the bill. Then complain when it takes two months to reconnect the gas. Had they paid the bill right away the gas would have likely been back on in time for when it got cold. I am curious as to what the average time is for reconnect across the whole company. Is this length of time normal? How many calls were placed before the bill was paid and how many were after? Too many questions.

I Said: This level of dickbaggery seems pretty clean cut.

Yes, the man for not paying his bills and the mans family not caring enough about him until he is dead, then they are looking for a payout.

If you don't want to pay reconnect fees then pay your bills. Turn the heat down to 50 degrees or something so your bills aren't that high.

It's quite simple. Pay your bills and your heat stays on. Utility companies exist to provide a service at a profit. The only person who has you best interest in mine is the person in the mirror.

If the man needed help there are organizations that can help, but you can't wait for them to come to you.

Of course, over here in Jolly Olde, it will never get turned off. The worst that will happen is that after a year or two a warrant will be sworn out and they will go in and install a prepayment meter, with the debt on the meter. Job sorted.

Pardon my ignorance but how does if matter if it's a prepayment meter or not if it never gets turned off? How does that work?

Crosshair: pwhp_67: Crosshair: It's quite simple.

No, but you appear to be...

Yes, when I provide services or do work, I expect to be paid for those per the agreement that was made beforehand. If I am not paid, then I stop providing goods and services to that person. If my boss stopped paying me for two months, should I continue to come to work for him?

If I consume goods or services from someone else, it is perfectly reasonable for them to expect payment for those goods and services per the agreement. If I do not pay then it is perfectly reasonable for that person to stop providing me goods and services.

A business and a charity are two different things. I donate to charities that I feel provide services to the genuinely needy and expect nothing back. I give money to a business and expect services and goods in return. Expecting a business to be a charity in perpetuity is unreasonable and unrealistic.

I know the gas/electric companies where I live give you several months at least before they turn off services. So this mans bill was unpaid for quite a long time before the gas was cut off. $500 in gas is several months of usage.

thomps: Werehamster: Is there any legitimate reason to charge reconnection fees, or is it just another way to squeeze a little bit of extra money out of the people who can least afford it and have the least power to fight it?

On a related note, fark T-Mobile.

i think the legitimate reason is to charge the people that are actuall causing the additional costs associated with dis- and re-connection of service directly for those costs rather than spreading them throughout the rest of the customer base.

With the corect meters, all it takes is somebody doinga drive-by and zapping the thing from the truck, some may even be able to be reconnectet at the office. If such customers are still being charged a similiar reco fee - that IMO is gouging. Even when someone has to come out to the meter, it's not really hard - takes 10 minutes tops - nobody needs to make 500$/hour to reconnect meters. So the cost does not represent the true cost of the reconnect. Utility contracters do not deserve 50$+/hour for their drive time to the clients house. Of course, the contracters don't always get to keep it all - there's definatly "extra" profit in the reco fee that the utility benifits from

/not all utilities are the same, but some are run by d-bags

Mongo cut wood: The Troll is strong in this thread. (those defending the company)

I don't think that word means what you think it means.

Hebalo: Jormungandr: I think what people are missing here is a farking "corporate policy" caused some guy's death.

No. Not True. Not at all. Some drunk who didn't pay his bills and was farking dumb enough to stay in the house when it was below freezing caused his own death.

the company COULD have maybe waived his reconnection fee, but this guy is not exactly a good customer.

But don't lay the blame on the gas company, no matter how much you hate them.

Just because somebody is a deadbeat, it suddenly becomes accetable to let him die over a few hundred bucks? Society spends far more saving stupid hikers.

Sure they guy farked up. Yep, he was kinda stupid. But it takes a cold hard freeper to say that his death is therefore perfectly acceptable or prefferrable to a company getting taken for a few hundie by a "loser". Sometimes, the already comfortable (even if by their own hard work) can suck it up so the less-fortunate and/or stupid can live.

/just speculation, but I wonder how many of the same freepers become part of "culture of life" when a brain-dead woman or a fetus is involved.

Chaghatai: Hebalo: Jormungandr: I think what people are missing here is a farking "corporate policy" caused some guy's death.

No. Not True. Not at all. Some drunk who didn't pay his bills and was farking dumb enough to stay in the house when it was below freezing caused his own death.

the company COULD have maybe waived his reconnection fee, but this guy is not exactly a good customer.

But don't lay the blame on the gas company, no matter how much you hate them.

Just because somebody is a deadbeat, it suddenly becomes accetable to let him die over a few hundred bucks? Society spends far more saving stupid hikers.

Sure they guy farked up. Yep, he was kinda stupid. But it takes a cold hard freeper to say that his death is therefore perfectly acceptable or prefferrable to a company getting taken for a few hundie by a "loser". Sometimes, the already comfortable (even if by their own hard work) can suck it up so the less-fortunate and/or stupid can live.

/just speculation, but I wonder how many of the same freepers become part of "culture of life" when a brain-dead woman or a fetus is involved.

How far does society's obligation go to help those who will not help themselves? The winter doesn't just sneak up. He had months to make an accomodation. I guess you are advocating zero personal responsibility for an individual, as you are putting the blame for his death on the gas company. If the guy was so mentally incompetent that he couldn't be relied on to take measures to do basic things like keep himself warm, perhaps his mother should have had him institutionalized. If he wasn't mentally incompetent, there was no excuse for him to leave his gas off for several months when he knew killing cold was coming on.

Sorry, this is not the gas companie's fault.

The more important question is, "Why would a 58 year old man not realize how cold it was and either put on more clothes, get a blanket, or call an ambulance?"

I suspect mental illness is involved, in which case, shame on his family for not keeping a closer eye on him. If he was just a stubborn stupid prick, well then I say good day sir.

MycroftHolmes: Chaghatai: Hebalo: Jormungandr: I think what people are missing here is a farking "corporate policy" caused some guy's death.

No. Not True. Not at all. Some drunk who didn't pay his bills and was farking dumb enough to stay in the house when it was below freezing caused his own death.

the company COULD have maybe waived his reconnection fee, but this guy is not exactly a good customer.

But don't lay the blame on the gas company, no matter how much you hate them.

Just because somebody is a deadbeat, it suddenly becomes accetable to let him die over a few hundred bucks? Society spends far more saving stupid hikers.

Sure they guy farked up. Yep, he was kinda stupid. But it takes a cold hard freeper to say that his death is therefore perfectly acceptable or prefferrable to a company getting taken for a few hundie by a "loser". Sometimes, the already comfortable (even if by their own hard work) can suck it up so the less-fortunate and/or stupid can live.

/just speculation, but I wonder how many of the same freepers become part of "culture of life" when a brain-dead woman or a fetus is involved.

How far does society's obligation go to help those who will not help themselves? The winter doesn't just sneak up. He had months to make an accomodation. I guess you are advocating zero personal responsibility for an individual, as you are putting the blame for his death on the gas company. If the guy was so mentally incompetent that he couldn't be relied on to take measures to do basic things like keep himself warm, perhaps his mother should have had him institutionalized. If he wasn't mentally incompetent, there was no excuse for him to leave his gas off for several months when he knew killing cold was coming on.

Sorry, this is not the gas companie's fault.

sorry - I still think that letting someone die to maintain a principle of personal responsibility is very, very cold-hearted. Prroviding a social safety-net for those who are too poor, too irresponsible or too stupid could simply be viewed as a cost of doing business in exchange for being allowed to profit off the rest. Good customers far outnumber the bad, so in the balance, it would still be a good deal.

But you advocate letting the guy die...hmph, as long as he was iresponsible that must make it ok...

C'mon - if someone foolishly climbs up an electrical tower - he's gonna get rescued - at great public expense. Why? because he might die otherwise, and that is compelling to those who are sreious about valuing human life instead of just using that value as a rallying cry against abortion. Bill the guy later, but being stingy, or worse, dragging one's feet over a reconnect fee is just heartless.

I hope the customer-service drones get PTSD over this (really, I do) - but maybe they can comfort themselves knowing they saved their employer a few bucks...

I'm saying fault doesn't matter, when someone's life may be in danger, the moral thing to do is look after the life first, and look after the money second.

Human life > $$$ - responsibility be damned

/responsibility is cool and an important value, but it takes a back seat in matters of life and death. No one should die over a few hundred bucks or to serve as an example of freeper principles.

MycroftHolmes: How far does society's obligation go to help those who will not help themselves? The winter doesn't just sneak up. He had months to make an accomodation. I guess you are advocating zero personal responsibility for an individual, as you are putting the blame for his death on the gas company. If the guy was so mentally incompetent that he couldn't be relied on to take measures to do basic things like keep himself warm, perhaps his mother should have had him institutionalized. If he wasn't mentally incompetent, there was no excuse for him to leave his gas off for several months when he knew killing cold was coming on.

Sorry, this is not the gas companie's fault.

THIS

Chaghatai: MycroftHolmes: Chaghatai: Hebalo: Jormungandr: I think what people are missing here is a farking "corporate policy" caused some guy's death.

No. Not True. Not at all. Some drunk who didn't pay his bills and was farking dumb enough to stay in the house when it was below freezing caused his own death.

the company COULD have maybe waived his reconnection fee, but this guy is not exactly a good customer.

But don't lay the blame on the gas company, no matter how much you hate them.

Just because somebody is a deadbeat, it suddenly becomes accetable to let him die over a few hundred bucks? Society spends far more saving stupid hikers.

Sure they guy farked up. Yep, he was kinda stupid. But it takes a cold hard freeper to say that his death is therefore perfectly acceptable or prefferrable to a company getting taken for a few hundie by a "loser". Sometimes, the already comfortable (even if by their own hard work) can suck it up so the less-fortunate and/or stupid can live.

/just speculation, but I wonder how many of the same freepers become part of "culture of life" when a brain-dead woman or a fetus is involved.

How far does society's obligation go to help those who will not help themselves? The winter doesn't just sneak up. He had months to make an accomodation. I guess you are advocating zero personal responsibility for an individual, as you are putting the blame for his death on the gas company. If the guy was so mentally incompetent that he couldn't be relied on to take measures to do basic things like keep himself warm, perhaps his mother should have had him institutionalized. If he wasn't mentally incompetent, there was no excuse for him to leave his gas off for several months when he knew killing cold was coming on.

Sorry, this is not the gas companie's fault.

sorry - I still think that letting someone die to maintain a principle of personal responsibility is very, very cold-hearted. Prroviding a social safety-net for those who are too poor, too irresponsible or too stupid could simply be viewed as a cost of doing business in exchange for being allowed to profit off the rest. Good customers far outnumber the bad, so in the balance, it would still be a good deal.

But you advocate letting the guy die...hmph, as long as he was iresponsible that must make it ok...

C'mon - if someone foolishly climbs up an electrical tower - he's gonna get rescued - at great public expense. Why? because he might die otherwise, and that is compelling to those who are sreious about valuing human life instead of just using that value as a rallying cry against abortion. Bill the guy later, but being stingy, or worse, dragging one's feet over a reconnect fee is just heartless.

I hope the customer-service drones get PTSD over this (really, I do) - but maybe they can comfort themselves knowing they saved their employer a few bucks...

I'm saying fault doesn't matter, when someone's life may be in danger, the moral thing to do is look after the life first, and look after the money second.

Human life > $$$ - responsibility be damned

/responsibility is cool and an important value, but it takes a back seat in matters of life and death. No one should die over a few hundred bucks or to serve as an example of freeper principles.

You're right. His family should've done the right thing and either paid to have his service turned back on or gotten him out of the situation. His gas was turned off in June. They had plenty of time to take care of this. Or you can just blame the company.

Beeblebrox: Chaghatai: MycroftHolmes: Chaghatai: Hebalo: Jormungandr: I think what people are missing here is a farking "corporate policy" caused some guy's death.

No. Not True. Not at all. Some drunk who didn't pay his bills and was farking dumb enough to stay in the house when it was below freezing caused his own death.

the company COULD have maybe waived his reconnection fee, but this guy is not exactly a good customer.

But don't lay the blame on the gas company, no matter how much you hate them.

Just because somebody is a deadbeat, it suddenly becomes accetable to let him die over a few hundred bucks? Society spends far more saving stupid hikers.

Sure they guy farked up. Yep, he was kinda stupid. But it takes a cold hard freeper to say that his death is therefore perfectly acceptable or prefferrable to a company getting taken for a few hundie by a "loser". Sometimes, the already comfortable (even if by their own hard work) can suck it up so the less-fortunate and/or stupid can live.

/just speculation, but I wonder how many of the same freepers become part of "culture of life" when a brain-dead woman or a fetus is involved.

How far does society's obligation go to help those who will not help themselves? The winter doesn't just sneak up. He had months to make an accomodation. I guess you are advocating zero personal responsibility for an individual, as you are putting the blame for his death on the gas company. If the guy was so mentally incompetent that he couldn't be relied on to take measures to do basic things like keep himself warm, perhaps his mother should have had him institutionalized. If he wasn't mentally incompetent, there was no excuse for him to leave his gas off for several months when he knew killing cold was coming on.

Sorry, this is not the gas companie's fault.

sorry - I still think that letting someone die to maintain a principle of personal responsibility is very, very cold-hearted. Prroviding a social safety-net for those who are too poor, too irresponsible or too stupid could simply be viewed as a cost of doing business in exchange for being allowed to profit off the rest. Good customers far outnumber the bad, so in the balance, it would still be a good deal.

But you advocate letting the guy die...hmph, as long as he was iresponsible that must make it ok...

C'mon - if someone foolishly climbs up an electrical tower - he's gonna get rescued - at great public expense. Why? because he might die otherwise, and that is compelling to those who are sreious about valuing human life instead of just using that value as a rallying cry against abortion. Bill the guy later, but being stingy, or worse, dragging one's feet over a reconnect fee is just heartless.

I hope the customer-service drones get PTSD over this (really, I do) - but maybe they can comfort themselves knowing they saved their employer a few bucks...

I'm saying fault doesn't matter, when someone's life may be in danger, the moral thing to do is look after the life first, and look after the money second.

Human life > $$$ - responsibility be damned

/responsibility is cool and an important value, but it takes a back seat in matters of life and death. No one should die over a few hundred bucks or to serve as an example of freeper principles.

You're right. His family should've done the right thing and either paid to have his service turned back on or gotten him out of the situation. His gas was turned off in June. They had plenty of time to take care of this. Or you can just blame the company.

Oh there's lots of dirty hands here - but just because somebody's is dirtier doesn't was the stain off the other parties who could have acted and prevented a death.

If somebody is drowning by their own stupidity, doesn't matter, I will place myself at risk to do something about it - it's just the human thing to do.

Not giving him the benefit of the doubt on the reco fee is all about not doing something if one doesn't think they will be compensated soon enough. Bah, the compensation is somebody lived instead of died - human life trumps personal responsibility here - there is plenty of guilt to go around.

Chaghatai: Prroviding a social safety-net for those who are too poor, too irresponsible or too stupid could simply be viewed as a cost of doing business in exchange for being allowed to profit off the rest.

And you don't think any of the "rest" would suddenly claim to be too poor, irresponsible, and stupid to pay their bill once they realized they could get what they wanted for free using that excuse? Sure, there are some people with a sense of dignity, but "pay us if and when you feel like it, otherwise no big deal, wiping your ass for you is our humanitarian duty" isn't exactly the smartest business plan.

Social services are necessary for the truly needy, of course, but not every worthless drunk whose pathetic story happens to end up on the internet after the fact falls into that category.

Oh, and for the people telling him to simply wear a blanket...

...Ever read 'London's To Build a Fire? In the frozen north, it gets cold enough that yer pretty farked without some form of heat like gas, a stove or a fire. Blankets simply don't cut it. That's why things like sleeping bags have temperature ratings.

/Don't know how cold it got for this individual - but pretending his heat was automatically a luxury is just ig'nant.