The insurance investigator can usually enter the damaged property at the invitation of the insured, while a criminal investigator is required to obtain a search warrant. The first goal is to determine the cause of the fire, and, if it is proven to be arson, the next step is to determine whether or not the claimant is responsible. It may benefit an insurance company if the claimant is criminally convicted, but if an insurance company appears too eager to convict, it may face lawsuits for malicious prosecution in addition to contractual awards. Some criminal investigators assume that insurance companies will not go as far with an investigation because their burden of proof is less -- they need only to show a "preponderance of evidence" and not proof "beyond a reasonable doubt." However, the insurance investigator's goal should be to develop as much evidence as possible to prove that the claimant was involved in the arson.