A building insured with commercial property insurance has been vacant for more than 60 consecutive days. Which of the following is NOT true?

The statement that losses due to vandalism are covered is not true when a building insured under commercial property insurance has been vacant for more than 60 consecutive days. Generally, many commercial property insurance policies include provisions that limit or exclude coverage for certain types of losses when a property is vacant for an extended period. In this case, vandalism is typically one of those losses that may not be covered, as insurers consider vacant properties to have a higher risk and may restrict or eliminate coverage to reduce their exposure.

In contrast, the other options outline conditions that are usually applicable in situations where a property has been vacant for longer than the specified period. Payment for unnamed perils being reduced by 25% reflects a common penalty for vacancies. Coverage for theft being completely removed and the application of reduced payouts for specified causes of loss are also standard policy provisions that apply in such circumstances. Understanding these nuances is crucial for property owners to maintain adequate coverage.