law only the contracting party could take an adverse action and this court you know even look into the facts it believes that the district court was wrong as a matter of law the facts however do inform and give examples of where an insurance company that is not the issue in company is actually the company that takes the adverse action but the court doesn't even need to review the factual record to that you would not at least for this case have to look further into the facts you could just cited i believe just based on if you will that only the signatory company could take the adverse action there's no need to review subsidiary companies and that is a point in which we believe the adverse action occurs in this case the plaintiffs stand and massey had tenant insurance through safeco illinois we have and but i'm just trying to understand if you had well if you had an independent agent i think you might be able to with a captured agent and i'm not sure the answer the question d one of the big issues that that came up was the question about how you deal with this language when it is insurance applied for and how you can handle dealing with the language the increase in the charge for insurance and where it support that the question was raised about the difference between the definitions of adverse action for credit employer insurance and the statute for credit turns to the equal credit opportunity act and if you look at it and you'll you'll find  eighty twenty four of the red grease that span all cases the set that language is set out there for the equal credit opportunity act the definition of adverse action and it really is quite similar to the definition for adverse action the denial revocation change in the terms of is this incredible arrangement for refusal to grant credits in substantially the amount or terms requested which there is yours are applied for part of it it almost not quite word for word but that the actions that are considered adverse actions trapped between equal credit opportunity act and and when you couple that with the fact that when the picture was originally an act and you didn't have a distinction between credit and insurance you to go through the four different types of adverse actions of specific the ones that you will credit insurance employment and government benefits and then you have the catch all phrase which we do not believe applies but if you follow through the history of this when you look at what sped by by the way they did it but adverse action was never defined to include the best right situation congress did not modify the definition of s which action for credit it's created an entirely new provision requiring a different didn't apply to credit in a situation where it's never been applied to insurance in the first place if you want to do it to focus on the specific language of the thicker statute and the meaning of applied for the question was raised about how you deal with this idea of the increase in credit apply increase their end the charge of the premiums for insurance applied for and as discussed in the brief there's a couple of examples of situations where you might have an increase in credit applied  statute is to give people notice that you have taken action against them it's our position that you haven't taken it you haven't you have to look at the actions this congress to find is being adverse and the one that will focus on this whole case is about the premiums so these people were charge between what you do under the table and what you do above what you might have accidentally told somebody the point that we're making is that congress set out for very specific kinds of conduct to constitute taking advice action denial there you go through the list on the one that we're focused on is the increase in the charge for insurance and the question is when do you increase something when the district court held that you have to have something there to increase what you're dealing with in all these cases it's a situation where you take a whole bunch of factors put them together and determine a premium there isn't something that exists that you then changing all these factors come into it the problem that you have with the way the statutes were and what the insurance companies have done is that they're applying they go straight through and apply the language if you look at  is what we're going to offer you if we we recognize that we have to give notice if we deny insurance if we do find operate it we change your premium we change the terms of your policy we cancel revoke your policy but in this situation we're making an offer it's also important to recognize is that while it's true that it's used in the automated computer system for getting insurance scores is very new insurance companies have been using credit reports for thirty years that's industry there's discussion at that page is not intended talk about how you deal with that language and i won't go through all that now because the time is short i do want to get a couple of points about the state how companies and the question of how you deal with which  initially done through the computer program but this gets back to the very question that we have to be getting here about how do you decide which edgy is responsible it's the issue intra or it actually charges the premium the fact that a decision is made behind the door behind the walls whatever it is every action to charge any additional premium that may be higher because of the information in a credit report but there was nothing to increase it from we've given you an extra two minutes to write thank you