what are they trying to do?

What is the name of your state? Ohio

On Feb. 19 my husband and I had a house fire. The fire was ruled arson, and after about three weeks my husband and I were charged with the fire, which we did not start! Three weeks after posting bond after our 3-day jail stay, the case was dismissed without prejudice due to lack of evidence (didn't even make it to grand jury), meaning of course that even though the charges have been dropped the case is still considered open and the detectives can still investigate and refile. Yesterday they obtained a court order for my husband's DNA and he took the test. So that is where we stand on the criminal end of things. Now on to insurance . . .

Homeowners is conducting a special investigation. We have submitted our normal paperwork to our adjuster, which includes our list of items lost, receipts for as many items as we had, as well as receipts for additional living expenses (other hotel bills, rent for where we are currently staying). We still have this really complicated sworn statement of loss sheet; I think we filled it out right. But the insurance company's attorneys want us to come in for what they call an "explanation under oath." They want to speak to each of us individually, stating it would take about two hours for each of us. They also want us to bring in our federal tax returns for the past three years, statements of any financial accounts we have in our names for the last year, any documentation of insurance claims, homeowners or auto, for the last five years. Why do we have to provide all that info? I can understand about previous insurance claims (which we have had none), but why the financial? Are they possibly trying to establish that we tried to do this for the money and will try to sue us for fraud? Doesn't make sense -- the house is still standing and we have only lived in it for a year and a half. Wouldn't any money we would get go directly to repairs? Also, should we bring an attorney with us to this "explanation under oath"? What if we can't afford one? We gave our statements about the actual night of the fire to insurance -- do you think they would ask us other questions, such as financial things? We just don't understand what they want. We would really appreciate any insight you could give us on what this might be about, and what we should and should not do. Thank you so much!

Arson is rarely prosecuted because it is so difficult to prove. Fewer than 17% of arsonists are prosecuted and fewer convicted.

You have multiple arrests made on what basis?

Why do the authorities believe you set the fire?

Claimlaw

Thank you for the statistic! Very interesting!

My husband and I were both arrested -- the detectives claimed they had "so much physical evidence it wasn't even funny." Hm -- then why didn't it even make it to the grand jury if it was such an "open and shut case" as they claimed? We and an attorney we consulted believe that they arrested us to maybe scare one of us or get one of us to break. We think that maybe they arrested us thinking that one of us would "rat" on the other -- of course that didn't happen and we did end up enduring 3 days in jail. Being a teacher, I also endured my name all over the front page of our local paper and having to go on paid administrative leave. Thankfully I am back to work.

They physical evidence they claim they have is against my husband. They claim they have video surveillance of my husband stuffing two jackets down a drain (we have not seen the video). What that has to do with the fire, I don't know. The night of the fire my husband and I had been out and had a little much to drink, and had a slight argument. They believe it might have been a "crime of passion" because of that. Also, my husband had lost his job in December, so they are also thinking that we did it for the insurance money. Things just don't make sense to us.

Right now we can't do much about the criminal side of it; we can only wait to see what if anything comes from the DNA test. Now we are turning our attentions back to the insurance to find out why we have to provide all of that financial information.

I hope my reply makes sense and gives you a little more info. I tried not to be too long-winded! Let me know if there is anything you don't understand. Thank you again for replying!

sooo

did ya do it?

Why DNA test?

Why did he stuff two jackets down a drain? I'm sure you don't have to wait for the video.

Claimlaw

No, we did not do it.

No idea why they want a DNA test. We can only make assumptions, such as if they found any DNA on these supposed jackets. But that is only an assumption; I have quickly learned that it is impossible to predict anything with something like this. We have never been involved in anything like this before and are completely ignorant, confused, and scared.

Also, my husband did not stuff any jackets down a drain. The police say they have video of it. But it was not him. We just wonder how valid this supposed video is. If it was so clearly him on this video, the attorney we talked to wonders why the case didn't even get to the grand jury. But again, it is impossible to know.


I hope I do not sound rude or ungrateful because I do appreciate everyone's interest, but I only mentioned the criminal part to give some background and to let you know that yes, we had been charged with this crime since it is probably relevant to the insurance part. But for now the charges have been dropped; no other charges have been filed as of yet. The major question I have is about the insurance company and going to this "statement under oath" with their attorneys. That is why I posted this under "homeowners insurance." Does anyone have any ideas or insights on that issue? Again, I truly appreciate any information about that issue that anyone can give me. Thank you!

They want all financial records in an attempt to prove motive.

DNA (your husbands skins cells would be on his own jackets) though what do drains have to do with anything?

Many are falsely accused of arson. Hire an independent Arson and or Fire Investigation Company for assistance.

http://www.fireexperts.com
http://www.arson-codes.com/linksout.htm
http://www.fcafire.com
http://www.ohio-criminaldefense.com

I don't think you are being rude or ungrateful. Just don't assume my questions are borne of simple curiosity. You asked questions that I cannot properly answer unless I have a decent grasp of the details.

I ask because #1. I don't help arsonists. #2 If you are arsonists, the insurance issue doesn't matter except to your mortgage company, if any. #3 IF you are arsonists, the best thing you can do is go away quietly and hope the issue goes away. It most certainly will. #4 Although poster MSIRON is correct that hiring independent experts is sometimes very useful, the insurance company doesn't need much more than a whisper of "arson" to effectively deny or stall your claim. These experts don't mean much until the claim is in litigation. If you end up in litigation, the practical affect is that you have lost.

Frankly, I don't believe that you are providing full disclosure on the arson side of this. Nonetheless, I cannot call you a liar.

An Examination Under Oath[EUO] is similar in form to a deposition. In function, the difference is that trial rules do not apply since it is a contractual obligation. You likely be called to the insurer's counsel's law office whereupon you will be asked questions, separate from another insured[your husband]that the insurer has a reasonable belief will assist them isnascertaining your relationship to this loss. This will include motive. Many recently unemployeds with financial and marital troubles have their homes burn for an undetermined reason - this does not make them arsonists. But it is certainly a convenient hook upon which to hang their denial after fully considering the issues of coverage.

Most small-medium communities have no skills or formal training in cause and origin, or arson investigations. Further, insurer's hire cause and origin investigators that are generally predisposed to look for a way to nail you as opposed to vindicate you. Often, a prosecutor or other law enforcement officer will use the results of the insurer's C&O report as a basis for further questioning and perhaps arrest[although it is unusual]. Thus, I believe that in light of all we know about this[your words] that you could very well have had no involvement in your fire.

You have an obligation to submit to the requested examination. You have an obligation to bring to the examination all requested materials to the extent that they are available to you.

If I were you, I would notify the insurer that you want to fully cooperate with their investigation and as such, you believe it will take you an additional 30 days to gather the requested material for your EUO. Then go to an attorney that specializes in Insurance Defense and who has no conflicts with your insurer. I don't care what any other lawyer tells you, you need a specialist[handled more that 20 residential cases] in 1st party property claims. If not, you are simply dumb.

Your next and/or perhaps better choice, in Ohio, is a company called Assura Catastrophic Claims. There is not much they don't know about this issue. I have worked with them through a few clients as claim preparers and expert testimony. You can Google them. This is not an endorsement. You may still require counsel later but they can advise you. I would ask for a free consult. Otherwise pay them if you have to.

Finally, you asked "why do we have to provide all this material" or words to that effect; Read Section 1. "Your Duties Following a Loss". It will address the EUO and the "broad" scope of the insurer's ability to investigate the loss. It also covers your obligations to the insurer. Coverage is precendent upon the fulfillment of your obligations to the insurer.

Claimlaw

Thank you so much for your detailed response. You answered all of my questions about the EUO and clarified for me just what might happen. Thank you also for the information on Assura Catastrophic Claims. I appreciate you referring me to a company that could help us with all of this.

I want to thank msiron too for the links for independent investigators. That is the kind of information we have needed all along.

Since we do not have the money to hire an attorney right now and since we can't get a court appointed attortney until an indictment occurs (hasn't happened, thank goodness), we have not had much opportunity for any information other than a 1-hour consult with a criminal defense attorney. The information I have received from this site has helped me to feel more knowledgable as to the insurance side of the case.

I apologize if you did not think I was fully dislcosing everything about the criminal side of the case here. I thought I gave you enough details; I did not want to go overboard on the details because so many people who have posted lengthy explanations on this site have been chastised by other users for doing so. I was not intentionally trying to hold anything back; I was simply trying to be a bit concise in my explanation. Believe me, my post about the criminal side would go for days. I am certain you do not want to sit here and read my emotional tyrade about what happened to my husband and me and how horrible and unfair this entire nightmare has been. But if you really want me to, I will. All I can tell you is that we are not arsonists. Bottom line. We are not stupid people.

As far as what the jackets have to do with the fire, we don't know. Honestly. All I know is that when I was arrested they told me they had that video. We do not know how they believe the jackets were connected to the fire, if at all. Again, I'm trying not to speculate because I have been wrong every time I have tried to speculate about anything.

We will follow your advice and go to an attorney that specializes in this at least for a consult at this point. All I wanted to know was some information about the EUO and I appreciate you explaining all of that to me. My husband and I both definitely understand that we need to go to the EUO and we understand that we must be fully cooperative with our insurance company. We do not want to risk anything that would prevent them for paying for the damages to our home. We just wanted some of our questions answered; we did not intend to make it look as if we did not want to cooperate. Now we do have those questions answered. Thank you very much for taking the time to explain everything to me. You were very generous in taking that much time. Thank you again. I'm sorry my response was so long.

One last point;

The insurer does not require anything near the threshold of "evidence" to deny the claim as the state needs to indict - which isn't much with a grand jury. Don't take the failure of a grand jury to indict as vindication.

If you did not do this, you need the best help you can buy - right now. Since you are strapped, you might suggest to your chosen counsel and/or the Assura people about a contingency fee. Although, you are better off to pay as you go.

Claimlaw