pistorius for not having paid for loads that would come in for a period of several months towards the end of two thousand and seven the as we moved into the calendar year two thousand and eight they were attempting to work out arrangements for payment historias was a shift wanting to be paid writing that they would leave the site we get to the end of february of that year  repaired historia secured judgment for the past due payments a four foot yacht was affected but they receive judgement for that al qaeda complained that the contractual duty pistorius while they remained on site and continued on the site to march seventeenth of two thousand and eight their duty was to keep the roads accessible so other trucks good arrive and dump i think there was some michigan making no complaint regarding road accessibility issues well at that point in time the court found this quite sour as if it were evidence that rebutted the claim that they were failing to keep the road open dispute over payment marsh was there not keeping the roads open for march one so they pulled from the site on march seventeenth they were keeping the roads open in the consequences of that timeframe not having the roads  open we were unable to get loads into our site for five weeks and the testimony that it was their duty to keep the roads accessible that's the testimony of mr pistorius himself the evidence that years would have been forty eight thousand dollars last a cost basis of seventeen thousand for maintaining the site for those five weeks was on revive it so in terms of our heavy rain they in managing the site it is their duty to make major the elements with which they are facing the at the weather the at the loads that others are bringing and if it is fly ash one day they are placed there they have free reign as to where they put any of these you know the fact that we knew biosolids were at or near one of the access roads far but they could always move it they were the ones in charge they didn't pistorius in charge of picking i think being piled up on both sides of the roads maybe nobody hears it where and what will happen with a flock of light and then you have a central illinois spring or late winter which causes which there's a lot of moisture now that that miss apprehensive what the obligation of pistorius was he is in gage to deal with these issues because these issues are expected are contemplated they are walk ons to of landfill sites such as this mark i believe the last service he was paid for it was in the plate summer i want to say september but it was it was in that time frame this is true this is true is that there were forty eight maintained on the side they continued to execute their obligations on the side they continue to build for services they said they were performing on site now did they continue to perform those services because of past due payments well they didn't leave the site they continued to bill for truckloads coming in on the side or they still doing their job keeping the access roads open which was what they were to do in exchange for the payment for the boat to continue because i submit that the only evidence is that they were not because those roads were not accessible but those wrote did close well that's the result and they're also testimony position is that they always have this continuing that they would do things to keep that road accessible they were bringing it rock at times well in advance of the road closure they were managing that road  anything that supports their position that they were to keep these roads accessible that they were doing that at all times that was one of their duties on this side they did it before it kept it open under similar conditions they get upset they're not getting paid and they're staying on side they charge because a truck stops not because they actually resources actually provide the service so trucks are still bought me and they're still charging but something's not getting done to keep the access road so and it got away from them and trucks no longer that comes through there was then seventy five hundred dollars of rest of work that had formed and a lost income light of all of the excuses they may want to assign they were hired to engage in an account of those excuses and keep that road open and they were in control of it and the mere fact that we may have had notice as to where they you call up or dissipated the call collaborate that's different than notice it's not a new one it's not an employee about peano that that was ever there i mean our agent for managing this site  is an engineer or powell is a salesman that goes up helps the fellow business to bring to the site but he's an independent contractor hart was an engineer that would review the site generally to determine whether we had environmental permit issues and assess it from an engineering perspective the main thread of the site in terms of keeping the roads open and moving the materials on site that's why we hired pistorius he was the person that we independently contract with to take care of those issues so i guess i i submit that the roles of harp and how did not displace not substitute or did not is it michigan is was the road is open it's not an issue the trucks are coming through and dumping as long as the road is open steps can be taken to preserve its accessibility so you know you know way and i mean there may as we would define road issue meaning accessibility on the harris town site it's is there value recovery is really the question then officiating it which is a word i've heard in the trial i don't know that it's a real word but it's a ready yet for resale to farmers or for self use as a soil neutralizer and they had planned to for was the job they were to have done in managing the line piles to been officiated for this contemplated resale those services never had to be performed as contemplated because the either own or at least in its farming operations from third parties they receive judgment dollar and a quarter dry ton rate for the management which they did not perform in the context of the original agreement we don't appeal that because from our perspective they were entitled to some compensation for having removed the alarm and we have you that being of management of the line pile is that that is the way they've managed but not only have they been paid for the services they provide they've been allowed to retain the value of the line r it is worth three dollars per ton coming directly from a court or a problem with this line is that it took more to apply it to the property to put it on the farm than a line that would come from the has value from the court would have been forty one thousand five hundred thousand five hundred dollars thirteen thousand five hundred three dollars from court cost him seventeen thousand eight hundred to apply because it may have been more of a slur benefit they enjoy that compensation even if we say that because the stuff was better then the trial are coming from the court even if we accept that the expense given credit for the expense of put it on the ground they still bit rich are concentrated agreement would have been much more money that we would have expected for this line which would have bet this defendant's three to six dollars per drive three right forget forget this case i'm saying when you come into court and say we expected that this could have gotten six dollars we could have gotten six dollars fifty doesn't that it's because this this material isn't really i mean they they speculated about selling for six dollars and then mr stocks talked about wildly that speculating wildly fluctuating values must have value in excess of that otherwise why spend the money that well because you've got to get rid of it yes if you've got of this pile and that pain is not going to pay for anything until the pilot is out of it that was one of the condition from others and on the farms where you typically would put on somebody else's farm you would typically charge the owner for it to charge anybody because that in things were charging they did not hit they put it out at no cost to the any payment for any of this line until after they this is months and months later and after they're still talking about well we we've been remiss in pain you we understand that in a brick wall or hit a wall or cash as to the murdoch site i would simply say that in the complaint the allegations of how they breach the contract work number one they didn't level the materials and number two they placed this material beside the road as the only two allegations of the line was a treasure to pistorius it was not trash after the value of that keep in mind the transportation the removal all of those services we paid for we got sued on another count of the complaint that we do not take appeal from the second elements of the original contract and we've paid them for that otherwise they were paid for something they provided no service because that lie was never managed on site it was never dried out o sight ever ready for sale side so they're getting a dollar of debt they're wanting to say this had no value because of all these things we had to do so we're taking the line in kind if you will they sued us to get paid cash on to move some dirt they were paid separately for that so it was coming ahead and it was getting dumped they were pay the plan was that once it was there you would then officiate you would take those steps of that you could turn around and resell it because this was not a permanent site this was a staging site that was contemplated from the beginning zendo permits for this site it goes back to the advice they had received from that one what part of agriculture that we could temporarily stage if it was going to go and be placed in an agricultural use they never had to provide or perform any of those services for the back half of the contract a buck twenty five or dry time so they sue us for that saying that their acts of having to was going to hang onto it the hope the hope to enforce the payment that was his stats that so we've got in kind payment by enjoyment of the line cash payment by the enforcement of the contract even if we're buying wine from the cory that's three dollars which means they haven't performed a management duties was the seventeen thousand eight hundred dollars for the newer spreader type distribution of product whereas if we measured damages just from their enrichment  apples and oranges here they use one communication and say had applicability to what was fake place on the other side so any credibility questions or whether we thought it was a quick claim or not isn't even manifest in that