Coverage forms: CP 00 10 (10/12), CP 00 20 (10/12) and CP 10 10 (10/12) – Basic Form
Facts of Loss: The commercial business building of the insured sustained damage during a shooting. The building is vacant. The insured was not the intended target of the shooting but rather other persons unknown to the insured on the outside of the building.
The named peril of vandalism is questioned to trigger coverage in that the building was not the target to create damage, but rather a person or persons on the outside to cause injury or death. The damage to the building is incidental to that intent.
8. Vandalism, meaning willful and malicious damage to, or destruction of, the described property.
We are inquiring about a coverage interpretation.
Pennsylvania Subscriber
We don't see where vandalism applies to this damage – vandalism is intentionally damaging the property, and this was collateral damage. If someone is trying to shoot their drug dealer and they miss and hit the building, that's not vandalism. Vandalism is spraying graffiti on the building, or throwing bricks through windows, or other such acts where the intent is to destroy the property. In this case, it appears that someone was shooting at someone else – the point was to injure/kill the other party, and not damage the building.
In the basic form, we don't see any named perils that would apply. Therefore there's no coverage even before you get to the vacancy provision, which excludes coverage from certain perils if the property has been vacant for over 60 days.