Setting up a pay-as-it-burns plan to make it reflect the risk-reward to the homeowner and to the FD would be a difficult job even for an insurance company. I believe there is really no precedent in the entire insurance industry. I suppose my comment was really no more than an arbitrary change to blueprints for a castle in the sky.
That said, I can't argue that financially-driven arson by firemen wouldn't happen -- a post regarding arsonist firemen was earlier than my post -- and I don't think I'm insulting anybody if I suggest that a fireman would have a better chance of making an arson look like an accident, But IMO it's really a poor risk-reward ratio -- a piece of a couple of thousand dollars vs. hard time all by yourself.
Even assuming that a lucrative payback is possible, we just have to trust our firemen not to burn our houses down in the same way we trust our policemen not to burglarize us when we're away for the weekend. Furthermore, I believe that serial-arsonist firemen and burglarizing policemen have been a problem only in big cities, not in small towns.
I hate to tell you this , but Firebugs may live anywhere. Who do you think sets those fires in California when the weathers dry. Not city boys. It happens everywhere, A kid who grows up playing with matches likes the excitement of a lot of people running around putting out fires. It isnt just a city thing.