Investigation of suspicious fires - the role of forensic scientists instructed by insurers

1. Investigation of suspicious fires- the role of forensic scientists instructed by insurers Dr Chris Foster Arson Prevention Forum Case Study

2. Typical chronology • Fire claim notified to insurers by insured • Insurance Loss Adjuster appointed to commence an investigation, usually the same day, policy details provided. • Loss Adjuster attends the scene, identifies general circumstances and determines whether a forensic investigation is warranted. Arson Prevention Forum Case Study

3. Forensic fire investigations in the legal arena • Criminal intent • Insurance coverage - fraud, warranty exclusions or refusal to indemnify (e.g. material non-disclosure). • Insurance - recovery of outlay from third party - subrogation rights Arson Prevention Forum Case Study

4. Coverage - general Fraud, failure to comply with warranty exclusions or material non-disclosure lead to breach of contract. Arson Prevention Forum Case Study

5. Coverage-Fraud • False claim perpetrated by insured or by agent of insured. • Investigation will seek to determine if any evidence of premeditation and/or involvement of insured. • Standard of proof against insured is greater than balance of probabilities. Arson Prevention Forum Case Study

6. Newly unoccupied building – relevant factors • Insured must notify insurers of change of circumstances/use. • Insurers likely to add warranties to the policy conditions, e.g. building services isolated, all reasonable steps taken to make premises secure. Arson Prevention Forum Case Study

7. Forensic investigation initiated • Detailed briefing - circumstances, potential insurance issues. • Attendance on the day of instruction, or next day. • If possible, speak to fire service/police before scene inspection, then ideally liaise at scene. • Ideally obtain observations of first attenders. Arson Prevention Forum Case Study

8. PROGRAMME OF FULL INVESTIGATION • Preliminary investigation • collect all immediately available evidence • follow the no disturbance rule • Form tentative view & develop “working hypothesis” • Collect less accessible evidence-field archaeology. • Evaluate each new feature of evidence from a scientific perspective. • Repeatedly test the working hypothesis against the new evidence • Evaluate all evidence, and consider whether tests are required

9. Investigation objectives • Identify area of origin and cause. • If deliberate fire setting, the MO which may assist in identifying the perpetrator(s). • Evidence of security and condition of building services which may be relevant to insurance policy conditions. Arson Prevention Forum Case Study

10. FIRE INCIDENT FIRE SERVICE BASIC INVESTIGATION No SUSPICIOUS FIRE ? Yes (secondary fire) Collate, analyse and share data with police on daily / weekly basis No Complete FDR1 Community fire safety issues ? Yes FIT report

11. FIRE INCIDENT FIRE SERVICE BASIC INVESTIGATION Are insurers involved ? No Preserve scene RQ F.I.T Yes (primary fire) SUSPICIOUS FIRE ? Yes (secondary fire) FIT/CSI joint scene examination Collate, analyse and share data with police on daily / weekly basis Case review at scene with all agencies. Police IO decides on course of action No Complete FDR1 Community fire safety issues ? Liaise with other agencies Yes FIT report

12. FIRE INCIDENT Insurers notified FIRE SERVICE BASIC INVESTIGATION Are insurers involved ? Insurance investigation (L.A. + F.S.) No Preserve scene RQ F.I.T Deliberate fire Yes (primary fire) SUSPICIOUS FIRE ? Yes (secondary fire) Fire crews interviewed FIT/CSI joint scene examination Collate, analyse and share data with police on daily / weekly basis Insurers consider their position with legal advisors Case review at scene with all agencies. Police IO decides on course of action No Complete FDR1 Community fire safety issues ? If no criminal proceedings, but evidence that insured or agent started fire, consider whether to repudiate claim Liaise with other agencies Yes FIT report

13. Benefits of interagency investigations • Pooling of resources • Sharing of intelligence from different sources • Joint interpretation of evidence as it emerges Arson Prevention Forum Case Study