over a period of time they finally agreed on a certain number for all the damage to the building and the damage to the contents they agreed of the damage to the building was one hundred seventy four thousand one hundred ninety one dollars and twenty four cents that's the actual cash value which means replacement cost minus depreciation so it's depreciated value of the house the damage and for the personal property they decided that damage was one hundred twenty three thousand seven hundred sixty five dollars in six here today has been kind of faced with really kind of an artificial situation because this we're faced with this thirty thousand dollar figure that the that the trial court said was a shall you certainly can and then you have a car that's worth ten thousand dollars less and that's right it's understood that the case but in this case that's not what happened in this case that your client signed a certificate in which they said the house has been restored to its original condition so if if the house is been restored here's my question and i want is ice preface my remarks were and were in kind of an artificial situation because of this discovery dispute that happened in the it seems to me that if we accept the week's up the numbers as they are the numbers are the numbers that looks to me like your clients are going to make about one hundred forty three thousand hours on this fire spent in labor and materials one hundred seventy four thousand dollars then then you'd mean it would be it would be a wash but that's not what happened with him was it your client's you know  stonewall discovery and said we're going to tell you about thirty thousand dollars would have to tell you anything else and so the trucker got stuck with this thirty thousand dollar figure and so if you do the math estate finally paid one hundred seventy four thousand and your clients paid have to even require that the that the that the insurers before pete pete be tell how much they spent on the home zero five approve the status of the says that yeah yeah we have we we have to pay the x actual cash value but never more than the cost of repairs and they're going to come up in a minute and say we don't we never have to pay the actual cost of repairs and the actual cost of and i know that you said it in the end of your brief but if we accept that i'm sorry as a board that if we accept the thirty thousand dollars number we're in a situation where we're saying that these people had a fire they're going to get paid for their property their personal property they're going to get paid one hundred seventy four thousand dollars for to rebuild a house to cost them thirty thousand dollars a rebuilt and to me you know to me that's one hundred forty three thousand dollars p understand that that's a artificial number because if thirty grand is an artificial number but that's worth face and i and i agree that this is an unusual situation because the numbers are upside down and but the reason you have the numbers are ups down is as was alluded to by just scored is because we never got the real number and i guess i have a i have a feeling that the real number if if if the court if this went back or if it was done in the first place the real is that there's a public policy that says you should never profit from a loan from a from a from a unsure and loss and theoretically i see a profit or well there there's no double indemnity they receive made if they believe that they had a right under that clause that was just referred to about not paid more than what the actual repairs were then why why should they have why should need have been burdened with going back to the to the state farm wants to make a complaint about it let them go out there and say we believe that that really the repairs only amounted to one hundred twenty thousand or eighty hours later and we're entitle to get some money back but they didn't do please the court my name is dan all and i represent state farm firing as a company just as palmer you hit the nail right on the head as far as thirty thousand dollars being you know we're dealing with the artificial number because if this discover is the one hundred seventy four thousand dollars it's also an artificial number because it's an estimate that state farm prepare itself there was based on misrepresentations by the insurers and state farm file in this case the very an affirmative defense number seven which asserted that the insurance had misrepresented the state farm the amount of work that they had done prior to the fire with regard to the remodeling which here's the question you know people given that given what you're saying and terms of the condition of the home prior to the fire was misrepresented then chances are the personal property claims also misrepresented and therefore why isn't there a trial and everything as hundred seventy four thousand dollars figure and you're contending that that's a phony number too and and and you can you did contend that in your pleadings it doesn't look like that issue was reached though in the summary judgment which and i'm wondering if maybe that cuts both ways for both of you and that is is it would certainly it if the hundred seventy four thousand dollars number is a phony number then that would preclude summary judgment for the plaint but it might also preclude summary judgment for the for state farm because you know it if if the courts would have a tendency to stick state farm with their estimate then file should at least have the opportunity to say wait a second that's a phony number but those are the celebrations at this point and they haven't been proven so i'm wondering if maybe you know not only the the the value of the services tendency that they stay firm came up with this number and they're stuck with it and if stay firm says wait a second there's a reason why we came up with that number and it goes back to the players making misrepresentations to us well that's a big fat question and it's an important question because if that hundred seventy four thousand dollar number is a phony number then even the plant even at the plaintiff's theory that they're stuck with that number they become on stuff right so why should we just on the whole that the reason you should send the whole thing back and that is because under contract law the plaintiffs have burden of proving their damages in this case damages under contract are defined by the contract and the  was you couldn't get it you couldn't get any answers from them and you file a motion ok and you probably mostly ask for sanctions i don't believe that most was ever ruled congress and the court went to summary judgment now it seems that that said that you know because of because this is a violation i'm going to sanction the plaintiffs and my sanction is if they're stuck with that number we might be a little bit of a different position shouldn't we just sit since it's your thousand dollars for it thirty thousand eight hundred thirty seven dollars to sixty one cents of cost and making repairs to the home there's nowhere in their response today a service that that number is wrong that it's more than it back as the other amounts that they heard that i don't know that the japanese be speculating with regards to other damage is it fair to say that that that only concerned material as opposed to labor ye there's going to be some sort of i mean it's hardest to turn the clock back they haven't presented any evidence of damages beyond thirty thousand dollars what is that going to be if you send it back how are they going to prove it it is their burden to to pay one premium for the contract well maybe separate into you have this limit for this coverage and that limit and the actual coverage as to whether it's all risk or name peril may be different if one premium is one contract and deals with misrepresentations says that if there's a misrepresentation to one coverage that their insurer is parties to all coverage is not trying to prove to your honor today that there was a misrepresentation of all right well let me ask you this payments by the insurer they pay for twelve in coverage and they pay for personal property coverage aren't there aren't there different premium amounts for that those different coverages it's the it isn't that how you calculate premiums how much personal property you claiming here you're claiming twenty thousand dollars of personal property in your home you're going to pay ten dollars a month but if you're cleaning one hundred fifty thousand out with the foreign versus garcinia case there was some general concern to be overcautious that and sad all should be raised in a collar claim and if you look out fowler plane was actually request we file from a defense right away that time and by the time we got the counter claim filed i think later the supreme court actually amended their position with regards that sat off so that there right we do have a power play let me ask you this to just get back to the to the misrepresentation thing what evidence is in the record that the hundred seventy four thousand dollars figure was a fairly number because in the in the initial representations by the insurance after the claim they say they represented the case back fifty thousand dollars to fix up they spent fifty thousand dollars to fix up this is absolutely no support financially in the rocker for them to come up with that fifty thousand dollars that they claim and they did submit receipts in the underlying claim with regards to that room mai ling which amounted think that would have ended the case that often and the only thing we did whether or not they would have ended in summary judgment fashion as opposed to a trial and the and i say what really you really believe that that questions that need to be addressed here that we can affirm up the circuit court to grant a summary judgment in this case while the the policy the language in the policy as to whether they have to approve finding ourselves at the stake but the only other evidence in the robbery is the plaintiffs actually saying we don't know how much clout does never raise the question about if there was a of an obligation on them to disclose that information then it had cash value it's not an issue for determining the player's actual cost of repair so that one hundred seventy four thousand dollars number is is just the number that's out there that doesn't relate to the contracts of all claim