Fraudulent arson: A war of position

Fraudulent arson in Britain does not show a pattern of significant involvement by organised crime. This gives it a lower profile and, apart from a minority of cases prosecuted as crime, leaves most to be negotiated between insurers and insureds. Interviews with loss adjusters led to 71 cases being identified covering 1990–1995. The resources of the two sides in attempting to achieve and to resist payment of the claims and their success are evaluated. Because of the circumstantial nature of the evidence, lengthy negotiations are usual, along with an element of bluff, in what can be characterised as a process of private justice.The author gratefully acknowledges the support of the University of Liverpool Research Development Fund in connection with the field work on which this article is based.