CHILE · INSURANCE
A Chilean insurer is asking mall and supermarket operators to pay for cars stolen from their car parks, and the courts have not spoken with one voice. BCI Seguros, the insurer in the group around Banco BCI, one of Chile’s largest banks, has at least four lawsuits against three operators, according to a report published on Friday 13 November 2026 on the court filings.
The report says the lawsuits together claim about CLP 75 million (Chilean pesos; about US$75,400) and that the cases reached the Santiago Court of Appeals, the city’s main appeals court, on 26 October 2026. We could not open the case files ourselves, so these details rest on that one report.
Key Facts
- Dispute BCI Seguros is reported to be suing Chilean groups Parque Arauco and Cencosud and the La Laguna mall operator.
- Amount The reported total is about CLP 75 million (about US$75,400 at CLP 994 per US$).
- Law Chile’s 2016 parking law makes providers liable when a customer shows their security was inadequate.
- Split A ruling reported on 16 May 2026 threw out a BCI claim because the car’s location was not proven.
- As of 14 November 2026, 23:30 GMT.
An insurer pays its customer, then asks the mall to pay it back, and Chilean courts have gone both ways.
How the Claims Work
BCI first pays its customer for the stolen car. It then uses subrogation, a legal rule that lets an insurer step into the customer’s place, to ask the mall operator for the money back.
Chile’s parking law, Law 20,967 published on 17 November 2016, makes a car park provider responsible for thefts when the customer shows its security was inadequate, according to the consumer agency SERNAC. The operators answer, according to the report, that they do not own the car parks, that BCI is not a consumer and that third parties committed the theft.
The Cases Reported
The report says the 16th Civil Court of Santiago ruled on 22 September 2026 that Cencosud Shopping, a Cencosud group company, must pay CLP 7.2 million (about US$7,200) for a Hyundai stolen at a Jumbo supermarket (a Cencosud chain) in Maipú, a district of Santiago. It adds that the judge found the theft itself showed security was insufficient.
The report says Cencosud, a Chilean retail group, filed no evidence and did not attend the conciliation hearing. Its appeal argues that the police report places the car at Mall Arauco Maipú, another mall.
In a second case, the report says a Jeep Grand Cherokee was stolen from the Mall Arauco El Bosque car park on 3 August 2024, and BCI paid its customer CLP 22.6 million (about US$22,700) on 1 October 2024. The owner and the insured customer later sued the mall operator Parque Arauco for CLP 27.99 million (about US$28,200), and Parque Arauco argues that they cannot both recover for the same theft.
This suit was brought by the owner and the insured customer, not by BCI, which had already paid. The report says the insured and the owner signed a release on 1 October 2024 declaring themselves satisfied.
It also says Parque Arauco states that their later suit did not disclose the BCI payment.A court ordered Parque Arauco to pay that amount in June 2026, according to the report.
The company has appealed, and the date of the oral argument is not confirmed.
Courts Have Not Agreed
The Santiago Court of Appeals ruled the other way in a separate BCI case, according to a published summary dated 16 May 2026. It overturned an order for the mall administrator Arauco Malls Chile to pay BCI Seguros Generales CLP 21.19 million (about US$21,300), because it was not proven that the car was stolen from the mall’s own car park rather than the neighbouring Jumbo car park.
Chile’s Supreme Court left in place a CLP 8.9 million (about US$9,000) award against a mall administrator in a theft case, according to a published summary dated 31 August 2025, although that note does not name the insurer or the mall. Cases therefore turn on proof of where the car was and what security the operator provided.
Why It Matters
Each claim is small, but the principle is not: if courts accept BCI’s reading of the 2016 law, insurers have a clear route to recover what they pay out and mall operators face repeated claims. If courts demand strict proof of where the car was parked, as the May 2026 appeals ruling did, insurers must document every claim more carefully.
Investors following Chilean retail can read our earlier reports on insurers suing Cencosud over a fire and on Parque Arauco’s results. Our Chile coverage gives the wider picture.
What Is Not Known
We could not open the court files, so the details of the four lawsuits rest on one report of 13 November 2026 and have no second source yet. Hearing dates at the Santiago Court of Appeals are not confirmed.
We have no statements from BCI Seguros, Cencosud or Parque Arauco beyond what the filings are reported to say. Whether the May 2026 appeals ruling relates to any of the four lawsuits is also unknown.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is suing the malls over stolen cars in Chile?
BCI Seguros, an insurer in the group around Banco BCI, has at least four lawsuits against Parque Arauco, Cencosud and the company running La Laguna mall, according to a report of 13 November 2026. The lawsuits total about CLP 75 million (about US$75,400).
What has a court decided in these cases?
According to that report, the 16th Civil Court of Santiago ordered Cencosud Shopping on 22 September 2026 to pay CLP 7.2 million (about US$7,200) over a Hyundai stolen in Maipú. According to the report, Cencosud has appealed.
What is subrogation?
Subrogation lets an insurer that has paid a claim take over the customer’s right to sue the party it holds responsible. BCI uses it to ask mall operators for the money it paid out.
Do malls in Chile have to pay for stolen cars?
Under Law 20,967 of 2016, a car park provider is responsible for thefts when the customer shows its security was inadequate. Courts have decided similar cases both ways.
Sources: Case filings as described in a report of 13 November 2026 (not opened by us); Law 20,967 of 17 November 2016 and the consumer agency SERNAC (sernac.cl); published summaries of the Santiago Court of Appeals ruling (16 May 2026) and the Supreme Court ruling (31 August 2025). Exchange rate: USD/CLP 994.16, close of Friday 13 November 2026 (RT market data).
This article was produced by The Rio Times’ automated AI newsroom. Editorial responsibility: Matthias Camenzind, Publisher and Editor-in-Chief. The Rio Times also runs Ask Rio Times, which answers from 100,000+ of our own articles, the daily Latin America Power Map, and prediction-market odds on elections and markets.. How we use AI · Report an error