At a Glance
- Investigators believe a lighter ignited Layla Allen’s bedding in the April 2025 blaze.
- The teen made no attempt to escape, suggesting she was asleep when flames engulfed her bunk.
- A prior fire six months earlier-also started with a lighter-raises safety concerns.
- Why it matters: The coroner issued an open verdict, citing too many unanswered questions and urging the family to accept fire-safety help.
A house fire that killed 13-year-old Layla Allen in Prescot, England, last year is now being treated as a possible intentional blaze after investigators revealed a lighter was likely used to ignite her bedding. The April 2, 2025, tragedy has left authorities with “too many unanswered questions,” according to the coroner, after the girl’s parents refused to let her siblings be interviewed.
The Night of the Fire
Emergency crews were called to the mid-terraced home on Kingsway at 11:42 p.m. Firefighters found flames confined to a first-floor rear bedroom and had the blaze under control by 12:30 a.m., according to Merseyside Police. Layla, one of six children, was discovered on the top bunk; her parents and siblings escaped.
Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service investigator Ruth Baller-Wilson told the inquest Layla “made no attempt to escape,” leading officials to conclude she was probably asleep. “Layla was a fit, healthy 13-year-old; she wasn’t trapped, and there was no reason why she wouldn’t have at least been able to get down from the bunk, even if it was on fire,” Baller-Wilson said, as reported by Metro.
Burn patterns indicate the fire began on the top bunk, developed within the bedding, then spread to the mattress. An open window supplied oxygen, accelerating the flames.
Lighter Found at Scene
Investigators believe a lighter set the bedding alight, but they cannot say who held it. “It’s difficult to determine the exact sequence of events,” Baller-Wilson acknowledged. “If Layla did start the fire herself, there would be no reason why she wouldn’t escape the room.”
No accelerants or other ignition sources were identified. The lighter remains the sole suspected cause.
Prior Incident Raises Alarm
Six months earlier, another family member used a lighter to ignite a different bed in the same house, according to testimony. That fire, in a front bedroom, caused “considerable damage” and filled the area with smoke. Firefighters offered to enroll the family in SAFE (Safety Advice and Fire Education), but Layla’s mother declined intervention, and the event was logged as a child playing with a lighter.
Coroner Anita Bhardwaj expressed concern over the repeat incident: “I’m glad that social services are involved, because there are clearly highlighted issues.”
Barriers to the Investigation
Merseyside Police stated they “cannot rule anything out,” yet efforts stalled when Layla’s parents refused to let the surviving children be interviewed. The decision, the coroner noted, “prevented [police] from gathering further evidence.”
Without testimony from the siblings, authorities lack a complete timeline of who entered or left the bedroom before the blaze.
Open Verdict Delivered
After hearing all evidence, Bhardwaj returned an open verdict, saying she lacked “sufficient evidence to make findings of fact to reach any conclusion other than an open conclusion.”
“There are too many unanswered questions here. We don’t know what actually happened. We don’t know who started the actual fire,” she said, as quoted by The Telegraph.
The coroner urged the family to accept fire-service guidance: “I cannot stress enough the importance of you as a family, for the children, to have the input of the fire services to give you guidance and support in keeping the children safe. This is the second fire in similar circumstances within a very, very short period of time involving lighters, and this time the sad consequence was Layla’s death.”
Key Takeaways
- The fatal blaze started on the top bunk and was most likely ignited by a lighter.
- Layla had no physical injuries blocking escape, suggesting she was asleep.
- A previous lighter-started fire in the same home had already put the family on firefighters’ radar, but educational help was declined.
- With siblings not interviewed, police cannot determine whether the fire was accidental, self-inflicted, or set by someone else.
- The open verdict leaves the case legally unresolved, though social-services involvement continues.
