The scenario is ( A large warehouse burns down destroying its contents. The insurance company that provides fire insurance for the warehouse is now facing a substantial payout as a result of damagaes sustained.Unsurprisingly, the insurance company launches an investigation into the fire . The fire marshal report indicated no obvious cause for the fire such as electrical or mechanical failures, lightning strikes etc. The report did, however, indicate that the fire began in an area of the warehouse leased by a manufacturer of fish oil products and proposed that the fire may be the result of spontanous ignition of spilled fish oil. Under the conditions of insurance policy, flammable chemicals may not be sorted in the warehouse. On the basis of the fire marshal’s report, the insurance company felt the conditions of the insurance policy were violated, and thus refused to payout on any insurance claim for the fire. The manufacturer of the fish oil products, however, claims the warehouse was only used to store bottles, etc, and no fish oil was in warehouse. During the fire marshal’s investgation, 3 samples were taken from the site , sample 1 was material that appeared to be absorbent from a spil kit, sample 2 was of water runoff from the site resulting from the extinguishing the fire , and sample 3 was grass and soil from a patch of discoloured patch of ground near the driveway at the entrance to the warehouse. you have been contracted by insurance company to test the supplied samples for the presence of fish oil.