Which description fits a building that may be substantially damaged but it's not obvious?

A building that may be substantially damaged but does not exhibit obvious signs of damage fits the description of "Could Be Substantial Damage." This situation often arises after flooding or other disasters where the external appearance of the building may seem normal, but underlying structural issues may exist that pose risks.

Determining substantial damage typically involves assessing the cost to repair the building in relation to its market value prior to the damage. A building that falls into the "Could Be Substantial Damage" category requires further evaluation by qualified professionals to identify any hidden damages, such as compromised foundations, structural integrity, or damage to utilities that are not immediately observable.

In contrast, a description like "Apparently Safe" suggests there are no visible hazards, which does not apply here as the potential for unseen damage exists. "Building Obviously Substantially Damaged" indicates clear and visible damage, contradicting the premise of this question. Similarly, "Safe for Entry" implies that there are no immediate dangers present; however, the potential for hidden damage suggests that caution must still be exercised.