Portland family escapes house fire, but loses two cats and faces a costly recovery

When Mathew Humphrey opened the garage door, it was full of smoke. He could see fire at his workbench, where a battery was sitting, and around his chair. Upstairs, his daughter still needed him to reach her. ¹

His wife had smelled smoke and woken him early Tuesday, October 27, at their Northeast Portland home. She woke one son and told him to wake the other; both boys had been sleeping downstairs. Humphrey went upstairs, wrapped his daughter in her blanket and carried her out. He, his wife and their three children escaped. ¹

But that is not the same as saying the whole family survived. In KPTV’s October 30 account, Humphrey said he and his wife also tried to save their cats. Leo, who was 10 years old, and six-month-old Slyve died. He described the pain of being told to be happy because his family had made it out. ¹

The fire has left the family grieving their pets, facing extensive damage and trying to work out how much of a household they can replace. Humphrey puts his renter’s insurance coverage at $61,000 and the early estimate for replacing their belongings at $150,000. Neither the eventual insurance payment nor the final replacement cost is settled. ¹

Portland Fire and Rescue said preliminary indications suggest lithium-ion batteries caused the fire, according to KPTV. That is an indication of cause, not a final explanation of exactly which piece of equipment failed or how. The detailed household account and the agency’s preliminary assessment come from that single report. ¹

Humphrey said he had been helping a friend with an electric bike the night before. He checked it before going to bed and thought everything looked all right. About six hours later, smoke and flames engulfed the home. His observation of a battery at the burning workbench is relevant, but it does not by itself establish the precise failure that started the fire. ¹

The reporting does not identify the battery’s make or model, the charger, or whether the equipment was actively charging when the fire began. No final investigative finding or formal closure of the investigation has been established. It would go beyond the evidence to assign responsibility to a manufacturer, the bike’s owner or Humphrey.

“I did the best-case scenario, and my house still burned down,” Humphrey told KPTV as he warned others about electric-bike risks. His words describe the gulf between his reassurance before bed and what followed—not a verified finding that every safety precaution had been met. ¹

Boarded-up windows and fire damage now cover the home. Inside, part of the ceiling was cut away during firefighting after flames reached it. Humphrey described destruction throughout the house and the loss of belongings and memories accumulated over 10 years. That account conveys the scale of the household’s loss, but it is not a formal structural assessment or a determination that the building is a total loss. ¹

The distinction between replacing possessions and repairing the house matters. Humphrey’s $150,000 estimate concerns belongings, not the building. His stated coverage is less than half that estimate. Even if an insurance payment reached the full $61,000 he described, it would fall $89,000 short of the early replacement figure. That is arithmetic based on his account, not an insurer-confirmed shortfall or a final bill. ¹

Humphrey said he arranged his renter’s insurance years ago and had not updated it as the family accumulated more possessions. The policy figure now sits against the cost of replacing a household built over a decade. What the family will actually receive remains unresolved, as does the final assessment of what was lost. ¹

On October 27, we reported a Northeast Portland garage fire in which residents escaped before firefighters arrived and crews rescued a cat. That report left the cause, full damage, utility effects and ability to return home unresolved. The earlier KPTV account did not identify Humphrey or name the rescued cat. ^{13 2}

The October 30 report supplies a detailed account of Humphrey’s losses and a preliminary battery indication, but it does not give an address or otherwise establish that the two reports concern the same home. The earlier cat rescue therefore cannot be used to contradict his account that Leo and Slyve died. Nor can the earlier report’s location and firefighting details simply be transferred to his household. ^{1 2}

Humphrey is seeking community help while the family takes the aftermath day by day. Getting everyone out was the urgent task that morning. Replacing their belongings, learning whether the home can safely be occupied again and living with the loss of Leo and Slyve are the work still ahead. ¹