In which of the following situations would a property be considered unoccupied?

In this context, the term "unoccupied" refers to a property that is empty and not currently occupied by anyone, even temporarily. The correct choice identifies a situation where the property has been left without occupants for an extended period; in this case, the insured person being on vacation for a month means that no one is residing in the house during that time.

However, another option to consider is the building that has been condemned and emptied of all property. Here, the property is certainly unoccupied because it is officially regarded as uninhabitable, and no one is allowed to reside there. This situation could also fit the criteria for being unoccupied, akin to a property that is significantly vacant and unlivable.

The situation with the new apartment building being insured but not having any dwellers yet does not classify it as unoccupied in the same sense. It may be ready for occupancy, but it has not yet been filled with residents, which distinguishes it from a truly uninhabited status.

Similarly, the scenario involving the insured who moved out and removed all furniture from the house reflects an unoccupied status. However, the timeframe of three months indicates a longer period of vacancy, which could lead to different implications regarding insurance coverage or property status