scene mary's hospital before i get into the argument as a whole i think it might be wise if we limited our discussion to two the penalties and fees that were of a sense of urgency and conduct by both parties but for the purposes of the appeal what we would like to do at this point from this point further is to limit our discussion to the issues of the appropriateness of the penalties and attorneys fees on which is approximately thirty seven hundred dollars i think it's thirty six ninety six sixty seven i would i would urge the court to confirm those numbers just to make sure that the my calculations are correct and to the australian death of ten thousand eight hundred forty two dollars forty six cents what we'd like to limit our discussion to today is the actions in this case as it relates to the medical benefits and the medical massive amount or an end in this particular case to award one thousand nine hundred counties based on the outstanding medical not to back up for a second the accident in this case took place in early two thousand and three and the claim the medical aspect was turned over to the employee who was returning was going into the hospital for work that morning so she really wasn't travelling in the sense of she was going on a nursing visit or to visit a patient or client she was returning she was going to work the psych we do every day in the last it is  six through twenty five sixty three and what those exhibits show i know there's a large number there but those there are generally one eight letters and they show the conversations back and forth between house and what do they show in this case they show a lack of a cent every one of those providers pain the liens prior to the ultimate hearing in this case where we have attempts by the employer to contact in early two thousand and five the medical providers opposing counsel asking them to execute some forms that would allow us to obtain the medical records because several of the providers are saying this isn't listed as a comp case we can't release records so when you look at all things a fifth place in this case you look at all the  that highlights a point where one question from i there where does it doesn't specifically say when they were requested but it would have been before july of two thousand and five because in july fourth two thousand and five is when we sent a letter saying we can't notified of the amounts we were notified of some of the providers in a summary of leaves an attorney prepared summary they were not after bills that said i could see the record that i that i found that were provided she was the first time you requested bills from these again when we look at this record we understand that there was a place we understand that this is not the case but when you look at the tone of the conversation between the attorneys the fact that they they never called any of their fish and it would basically how they practice a file and they  call mr lutheran petitioner's council and finally those fell through and i think it was november october november of zero four when it went to church council said no we're not going to settle this case we're going to move forward try to the final issues this is not a case where you can come back and say well this was the exceptions with respect to the medical we don't think that this case is one where the petitioner should be allowed to not respond not cooperate not push any issues and then come back at the end say we get we get penalties had their mind made up and we walked in based on the tone of the questions that they fired at us we just asked this court to take a look at this case objective look and say are we going to impose full penalties on a lawyer in a situation where evidence but we cited the navstar case with respect to the amounts it also talks about it can be an abuse of discretion busy the commission is empowered with the discretion to award for partial penalties and so that's why i said earlier we believe that the finding with t fax portion of the brief they say no it was six months after the claims filed and i didn't contest that in the written brief been hearing from this again today i looked at this again and believe the commission the arbitrator were right that what if you was in a coma and those bills had to be paid and for some reason depending how you look at the facts it took peter six months or a year for the responded to figure out that a traveling nurse on the way to the hospitals and benefits what did you do above throwing toget my free look at it from that point on you can be officially got notice on june of two thousand and four this claim was compensable why should we be having to force this down their throats to take this case the hearing and so at that point it looked like ok maybe they're going to get the case case in line again by that time on a carrier for the husband's insurance and pay the majority the bills of the mr brian are paid almost twenty three thousand dollars of his own pocket for this medical treatment and so again you had part of the case going now you you can get kind of even if it takes a year and a half to two up to almost two full years to get benefits paid here you don't have to ask for penalties during that first year in order to have penalties awarded the penalties are awarded on the basis of the entirety of the behavior from when this this accident first happened up until we took it to here and i don't see that there there was the responsibility and once the benefits were starting to be paid you to take the case to hear it again once you decide that it's ready to go you take your case to from the arbitrator you ask for penalties which is what happened here what what they responded is is trying to that in any way stood in their way of paying time benefits and the purpose of additional compensation or panel it's created this and sunnah for certain kinds of behavior clearly and again when you when you have an accident victim like that's when it clearly work related injury dies a year later it's been in the home of the whole time but not a single penny on the case is paid until almost two years after the accident economics want to once people respond in some ways the reason that five people have individual look at this case believe that the respondent deserved to win on the penalties because they thought that was unreasonable and they have to create this incentive that provided that if something is perfect and they want to bring it to a head they file and indeed they filed one almost every month in this case and they never called it a repair it wasn't till the very end now why did this case good hearing they file the claim they had the benefits they had other think they had future saying that he's willing to work to try to resolve this yes this case went on longer than a yes if it wasn't pristine model that we would hold up but what we're saying what we're asking this court is to look at look at the record the lack of  discussed and are no longer addressing we're looking at approximately thirty five thirty four thousand dollars in terms of the we think that that's reasonable under the circumstances and we ask you t and one last thing i mentioned something to my main argument i didn't get back to and i apologize on the issue of our pockets you'll note that the response of mr luther filed to the penalties petition indicates that we want to head pay that twenty three thousand dollars just prior to the arbitration date there as he puts it in there based on unsubstantiated or undocumented references that you're backing curtis and i think that itself is another another example of the fact that there was not