Which of the following is a non-covered cause of loss if a building is vacant for too long?

In the context of property insurance, a non-covered cause of loss is often linked to specific conditions outlined in the insurance policy, particularly in relation to vacancies. When a building is vacant for an extended period, many standard property insurance policies impose limitations and exclusions for certain types of damage.

Vandalism is commonly categorized as a non-covered cause of loss in policies when a property has been vacant for a certain duration, which is often typically 60 days or more. This is due to the inherent risks associated with vacant properties, as they may become more susceptible to vandalism. Insurers understand that a property with no occupants may attract malicious activities, leading to possible claims that could result from vandalism.

In contrast, causes of loss such as fire, theft, and windstorm may still be covered under certain policies, even if the property is vacant, although there may be specific conditions or higher deductibles in those scenarios. This distinction is essential for property owners to understand so they can take proactive measures to maintain coverage and safeguard their investment.

Thus, recognizing that vandalism becomes a non-covered cause of loss during prolonged vacancy helps property owners navigate the complexities of their insurance policies and prepare adequately to protect their properties.