More on Mysterious Disappearance v. Theft
The burden is always on the insurer to prove that a loss fits within an exclusion; it is never the duty of the insured to prove that the exclusion does not apply. The exclusion is not, however, ambiguous; it just needs to be proved beyond a preponderance of the evidence.
There is a provision in which mysterious disappearance creates a presumption of theft. By placing such a presumption in the policy the insurer is creating a contractual rule of evidence. It is a rebuttable presumption. An insurer can prove no theft occurred.
The author and publisher disclaim any liability, loss, or risk incurred as a consequence, directly or indirectly, of the use and application of any of the contents of this blog. The information provided is not a substitute for the advice of a competent insurance, legal, or other professional. The Information provided at this site should not be relied on as legal advice. Legal advice cannot be given without full consideration of all relevant information relating to an individual situation.