Critical Reasoning

The Central City Church building was recently damaged by a fire that occurred overnight. The insurance company will not pay on a claim if it is determined that a fire was started deliberately. Since nobody was in the Central City Church building at the time the fire swept through the structure, the insurance company will most certainly reimburse the church for the damage caused by the fire.

Which of the following is an assumption that is required to reach the conclusion above?

Fire damages are generally the most expensive type of loss that insurance companies cover.
There was no one in the building at the time the fire swept through the structure.
No individual would fraudulently profit by setting a fire in the church building.
The insurance company typically pays claims for similar situations in other non-residential structures, such as office buildings and restaurants.
The fire was not deliberately started by someone who then left the building before the fire grew.

The Central City Church building was recently damaged by a fire that occurred overnight. The insurance company will not pay on a claim if it is determined that a fire was started deliberately. Since nobody was in the Central City Church building at the time the fire swept through the structure, the insurance company will most certainly reimburse the church for the damage caused by the fire.

B) There was no one in the building at the time the fire swept through the structure.
E) The fire was not deliberately started by someone who then left the building before the fire grew.[/quote]

B vs E

Since no one was there in the building when the fire broke, company will pay for the damage. It implies, company believes that there is no deliberate fire, since no one was there in the building when fire broke. IMO E

B restates the evidence (read bolded sentence). Also this choice does not connect with 'no deliberate attempt'

I agree with above explanation by PNK . IMO is E.


What is OA?

E. The fire was not deliberately started by someone who then left the building before the fire grew

Just remove the not present in the above sentence n conclusion falls apart..
Has to be E...