central city church

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Oct 03, 2011 6:54 am
Followed by:4 members

central city church

by nidhis.1408 » Tue Nov 08, 2011 12:53 pm
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?
a.Fire damages are generally the most expensive type of loss that insurance companies cover.
b.There was no one in the building at the time the fire swept through the structure.
c.No individual would fraudulently profit by setting a fire in the church building.
d.The insurance company typically pays claims for similar situations in other non-residential structures, such as office buildings and restaurants.
e.The fire was not deliberately started by someone who then left the building before the fire grew.
Source: — Critical Reasoning |

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 416
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2011 2:18 pm
Location: Delhi, India
Thanked: 13 times
Followed by:9 members

by vaibhavgupta » Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:00 pm
nidhis.1408 wrote: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?
a.Fire damages are generally the most expensive type of loss that insurance companies cover.
b.There was no one in the building at the time the fire swept through the structure.
c.No individual would fraudulently profit by setting a fire in the church building.
d.The insurance company typically pays claims for similar situations in other non-residential structures, such as office buildings and restaurants.
e.The fire was not deliberately started by someone who then left the building before the fire grew.
IMO E

Whts the OA ?
If OA is A, IMO B
If OA is B, IMO C
If OA is C, IMO D
If OA is D, IMO E
If OA is E, IMO A

FML!! :/

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Apr 23, 2010 12:03 pm
Thanked: 3 times

by IWillSurvive » Tue Nov 08, 2011 2:17 pm
I would say Choice E? This seems to be what Manhattan GMAT calls a "Logic Gap" assumption question, or maybe even an alternate model of causation.

I would say that the assumption was drawn based upon "nobody was in the church". It has to tie back to that statement.

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 21
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2011 12:15 am
Location: India
Thanked: 4 times
Followed by:1 members

by [email protected] » Wed Nov 09, 2011 2:56 am
I would also go with E
Ashish

If my post helped you- let me know by pushing the thanks button

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 242
Joined: Fri Aug 01, 2008 8:49 am
Location: Delhi
Thanked: 6 times

by ranjeet75 » Wed Nov 09, 2011 6:41 am
Yes the answer should be [spoiler]E[/spoiler]

If we negate the statement we get that "the fire was deliberately started by someone and then he left" and in this case the insurance company will not pay. But the insurance company will pay then the statement is right.

Legendary Member
Posts: 627
Joined: Thu Jun 23, 2011 9:12 am
Thanked: 4 times
Followed by:1 members

by mankey » Thu Nov 10, 2011 10:28 am
IMO: E. What is the OA?

Thanks.

User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 296
Joined: Sun May 29, 2011 5:10 am
Location: Vietnam
Thanked: 10 times
Followed by:5 members

by tuanquang269 » Sun Nov 13, 2011 7:34 pm
OA is E. This is the best answer