Why a fire investigation of your own
After a fire one question is central: how did it happen. The answer to that question determines whether your policy pays out, or whether the insurer relies on an exclusion. In that field of forces, the fire investigator’s report is no technical detail — it is the pivot of your file.
Insurers have fire investigations carried out by firms with which they have long-standing relationships, and in some cases by firms which they wholly or partly own. That does not automatically lead to an incorrect conclusion, but it does make an independent assessment of your own a sensible step.
Investigation in accordance with NFPA 921
We work to NFPA 921 — Guide for Fire and Explosion Investigations. This international standard prescribes a structured, scientific approach: the investigator formulates hypotheses about the cause, tests them against the physical traces, and systematically eliminates alternatives. Only when all other possibilities have been excluded on reasoned grounds can a conclusion be drawn.
That sounds self-evident, but in practice it often is not. In the Netherlands, “fire investigator” is not a protected profession. Anyone may describe themselves as such, and anyone may conduct investigations in their own manner. Only a handful of firms in the Netherlands have investigators with internationally recognised certification (CFI, CFEI, CFII).
The Willingham case
That poor fire investigation can lead to disastrous outcomes is painfully illustrated internationally by the case of Cameron Todd Willingham in Texas. He was executed in 2004 on the basis of a fire investigation that was discredited by independent experts after his death. The “evidence” used (cracked glass, burn patterns on the floor) was found by subsequent NFPA-compliant analyses not to be indicators of arson. The case has since served as a textbook example of what happens when fire investigation is not conducted in a structured and falsifiable manner.
In the Netherlands the stakes are rarely life and death, but they are health, reputation and a lifetime of work: an unjust conclusion of “suspected arson” costs policyholders their settlement, their policy and sometimes their home.
What we do, precisely
Site inspection
We attend the fire scene as quickly as possible. We document what we find, record burn patterns, take samples where this is meaningful, and speak with witnesses, fire-brigade personnel and neighbours. Here we work with you, not with the insurer — you are the client, the report is yours.
Hypothesis formation and testing
We formulate possible causes: technical fault (electrical, equipment), human action (smoking, cooking, candle), external factors (lightning strike, arson from outside) or intentional act. We test each of these hypotheses against the physical reality. What fits the traces, and what does not?
Assessment of the insurer’s report
Have the insurer or the police already produced a report? Then we lay it alongside our findings and alongside NFPA 921. We identify where the methodology falls short, where conclusions are not supported by the evidence, and where alternative causes have been unjustly left out of account.
Reporting and legal usefulness
Our reports are produced in a form suitable for the claim settlement, for the Disputes Committee and, if necessary, for the court. Clear language, technical substantiation, and a conclusion that stands — even under criticism.
When you should engage us
- In any fire where the cause is not clear.
- Where you have doubts about the insurer’s or the police’s report.
- Where the insurer suggests that you “should have known” that something was wrong with the installation or the appliance.
- Where there is a suspicion of intent — then an investigation of your own is not a luxury but a necessity.
Call +31 30 662 2424 as soon as it is safe to do so. The sooner we are on site, the more we can record for you.