In an Open Peril policy, who bears the burden of proof to show that a loss was caused by an excluded peril?

In an Open Peril policy, the insurer is responsible for proving that a loss was caused by an excluded peril. This type of policy provides coverage for various risks unless explicitly stated otherwise in the policy. In the case of a claim, the burden of proof lies with the insurer if they argue that a particular exclusion applies.

The rationale behind this is that the insurer crafted the policy and has a better understanding of the terms and exclusions than the policyholder. Thus, if a claim is denied based on an exclusion, it's the insurer’s duty to demonstrate that the cause of the loss falls under that exclusion. This framework protects policyholders by ensuring they don’t have to defend against exclusions they may not be familiar with, thereby maintaining a fair balance in the insurance contract.

In cases involving other parties mentioned, such as the named insured, insurance regulators, or adjusters, their roles differ significantly from that of the insurer in terms of burden of proof. The named insured typically needs to establish that a loss is covered, while regulators oversee compliance with laws, and adjusters primarily assess losses rather than serve as arbiters of coverage disputes.