now with that form what she's signing inter ethnic to is that she is he she is actually aware she has actual knowledge that in the evidence at trial there was no evidence that she herself was aware  any building codes or she herself even if she saw what was going on there is no evidence that she would have herself no there's no evidence that she had a commute conversation with with midwest electric it's this ok we're doing this substandard so we could have been exposed wires jim i mean if she was in the basement she would have seen exposed wires i mean you don't have to have any special education or expose puts up a wall to cover an entire area and they have no reason to put it up except to hide something i mean how do you justify and why do you put be that it would be cheaper to put up the wall and hide it then fix it well this i mean isn't that that's what the inference is so if you were to do that you wouldn't be able to get permits for the city which he did but sort of you know this gets a government and next another thing she didn't get the permits you know she's been she's been in this business who's doing this as a matter of st home she knows you have to have permits right but she doesn't get permits and she knows she doesn't have permits have you backsplash you tiles in the bedroom you have your windows and you carpet i supposedly went through everything to get to the point where she could say ok it's a complete renovation and that the whole like every room in the house was renovated it we can't you make certain reasonable inferences from the evidence well i think that's you know when you have someone who you know the defendant who doesn't there's no evidence she knows anything about the structure architecture or u yes wires are not good or are this the slab is only one inch thick everywhere with with no but it kind of damages to if i may yes people of this that you know part of the damage is ninety one trial court who had the opportunity not only to listen to that testimony but to observe the demeanor of the witness during the course of their testimony so that's that's one thing you know of course also with respect to the knowledge issue in the record i have pages in the report of proceedings are sixty two to sixty four there was a color query and examination that i had with the defendant regarding the scope of her knowledge regarding the repairs and she was impeached on this issue and eventually acknowledged that she decided what repairs were to be made that she consult with midwest allegedly according to her testimony yes but the point is is that she had testified at the position it was impeached at trial that she made those decisions through the substantive work that reflect the work that involve concealment of defects she was not only in the basement she had the keys to the house she was the owner of the house she visited there on a regular basis but she had actual knowledge that the try was being performed because she saw that work she had actual knowledge that the concrete work was being performed because she saw that in fact to the concrete she testified about the fact that she knew concrete was removed she knew it was replaced and she knew that it looked different plainness testified of life during the course of the trial as to information that they relied upon there were a variety of factors i don't have enough time to go into paul of them but one of them was initial listing and why death so important in this particular case as was also supported by the defense by the defense testimony on another point on which she was impeached is the fact that she wrote this listing this was not a free this is not real estate agent's comments trying to market the property this is the actual words of the defendants and that was an exhibit i believe it was nineteen different segments of the record correctly which was the word document containing the information that she put into the listing and that included a complete renovation and so what is a complete renovation please read of a ship means that everything that has to be any defects in the house and she attested to that which that documents in food is part of the real estate contract she had tested the absence of defects despite her actual knowledge of the general conditions the case including a trial in the court the trial court so found and i would submit to you that it would be appropriate for this court to file to follow please act versus jorgensen because the facts in this particular a commercial endeavor she purchased the property with the intent to do whatever work that she thought was appropriate and to sell it for a profit this in fact was for business and  sorry let me finish this some she she never presided at the property she never intended to reside at the property she realized significant profit from the sale of this property hands it was comparable to the profits that she had realized from prior commercial sales you know this indicates a strong profit and i would strongly suggest here honors  offend its activities is consistent with regular commercial activities and so for those reasons i believe that the consumer fraud is applicable and it's for those reasons also that it involves the type of commercial transaction contemplated by the act and certainly defendants how can that was deceptive within the meaning of section t what happens if someone hits their parents home and they sell it without them ever living there what happens if there is you know a home with two people on the title one of them lives there one of them doesn't is one of them as well but this is a into a fight fight one not the other in the case where it's a