a conversion claim but he's got a few good faith purchaser and here where mr monk and they did it he knew those two items that he knew that the price was suspicious he's in his words the prices were too low and too that the grant was getting ready to run man that the grand was going to  representative to monitor the credit because it's norman so grant who got legitimate title in the initial phone is right in the initial phase yet so how does the buyer in their position what burdens under the u they required to perform to monitor the credit performance of of your one of your customers when he pays a quarter to a third of the price that he figures  one party didn't didn't pay we have all kinds of situations like that where something is sold on credit and the end of the person given credit doesn't pay but doesn't make the title or the bargain basement price means staff just bend and was saw an opportunity to take advantage of what he perceived were stolen goods if he didn't make that judgment there was not a dime of it paid and there was no reasonable explanation but that he engineered this entire deal to steal it it was a one time percent i'm not trying to establish that at some point they're a reasonable person should have said it was or was not stolen i don't have to because m that was the conclusion he rea well and when that happens then the person who i think it's an evolutionary process to know you've been defrauded and when cooper came to that realization i think it was sometime shortly after may or may first when they had that meeting where they learned what the prices were that was the first time they knew that these fires were paying a quarter to a third of us of a grams obligation which that fact is highly suspicious and until they knew that they could have suspected they weren't going to get paid they were having trouble with collection but they didn't realize it was a fraud on them and the problem is he investigated the fact of the security interest and thought he was home free when he realized there was no security interest but that's not the law defense suspected there was a problem that that's less grand was going to pay but the defense inquired of the status of the security interest and when they found none but they were home knew here they were at risk of getting paid for their product and they didn't do anything about it until late march for the heart of the investigator they still didn't do anything about it when when my client invited their local salesperson  out to the warehouse to look at the product to see that he was buying it and they didn't do anything about of my client mr called mr coward instead of him buying this stuff do you guys have any liens on it so that's what the real history  have you ever heard the expression if sounds too good to be true it probably goes to my classes five things you're not going to give the end of the issue that i knew something was up because i didn't analyze the death went and that's the honest to goodness truth so now  show when it was that he discovered that i think that the main point i want to make is this has already been made and that is that this was a conversion this was a sale cooper knew exactly what they were getting into their big company they had  it is necessarily i'm addressing there's if if if you consider their argument in this context then we get to that point in good faith fire our position is that mr green was the owner he had the right to sell them the only obligation he had to cooper was he was supposed to and trust in applies where those are delivered to a merchant who deals in those types of goods and the person transfers the assets doesn't necessarily know that there's going to be an attempt to transfer the goods onto a third party and in particular he doesn't know you and we found and the defendants do you know if this goes on the verge of bankruptcy ok so he's what were they doing anything he can do to get his hands on some money stave off other creditors so they have a reasonable belie