s claims that they only have to pay five hundred fifty eight dollars which is in the insured value plus refund shipping charges of one hundred eighty nine dollars for a total of seven forty seven the united states so he would have declared a higher valuation why is something like that every one case where the lady was told you can't bring you know this package on board it's the remains so she he had the opportunity to declare and pay for a value this was not an ex con pictorial like in the clicker case the judge hostetler wrote where the airline said well you can put your dog in our hold but we won't let you have any additional coverage but rather this is a case where there was a very soon clear and specific opportunity for mr belin to declare and pay for one and that's where the shipper declared no value but no extra coverage or insurance either through the carrier or from an insurer in those cases as the ninth circuit and other circuit at the notices and the opportunity to obtain higher coverage typically the limitation isn't isn't forced even when there is no subjective knowledge of the limitation and honestly in many of those cases the outcome seems harsh and then there's another smaller bucket of cases where the shipper actually obtained additional insurance may not have been full coverage but they obtain insurance either from didn't buy any coverage or insurance its release value he wanted more than one hundred dollars he says it's somewhat equivocal when you look at his deposition about half the times it comes up in the deposition he said he wanted sixty thousand dollars and other times  which is going to be used by u p s and the customs officials of both countries the ukraine and the united states and he swears in that in four ways the value of this shipment times the value that's been declared for for customs purposes of insurance the clerk sees a red flag this is not typical this is highly unusual  and again all we have is bell extends to money on this but he says that the clerk called the superior you know her his or her supervisor basically this guy wants sixty thousand dollars and all the documentations that we're going to present to the customs of both countries is five hundred fifty eight well that's a huge red flag it's nowhere it's true it's nowhere in the tariff that  one hundred thousand dollars and i seek to insure it for more than one hundred times that for ten million dollars i don't think the insurer is going to write the policy i don't think i'm going to get it because no one wants to be at the back end of that controversy laws and he swore that these were worth five hundred fifty eight dollars how could the clerk exercising common sense and prudent business judgment have accepted a valuation of sixty thousand dollars that we would be here on a different intentionally involved in a customs foundation well it it's certainly one of the two reasonable things that would come to the mind of somebody facing this kind of a transaction one is there something funny here on the contract was that u p s would carry a shipment halfway around the world for one hundred seventy nine dollars which was valued at five hundred fifty eight dollars that's what mr beilin signed for when was asked in his deficit issues did you understand when this is an excerpt of record at page ninety three when you ship the paintings with a five hundred fifty eight value did you understand that the five hundred fifty eight dollars was the amount like the electric company u p s does not like a phone company it's totally deregulated and you have to flip to another question and that is would you p s have gone forward with the transaction had mr bell insisted on some coverage other than the five fifty eight which he swore to for customs purposes short of something i trust around a violation they don't have any obligation to take a package from anybody that's absolutely correct we have u p s has no obligation to do so but mr bell like had a thirteen through fourteen he testified in the s c r at fifteen twenty five through twenty six that he in fact had use d h l for an international art shipment previously it's a fact and it's admitted that he could have gone to another carrier he could have called mr castle because his testimony was that this was directly contrary to mr cassels instruction to obtain the insurance he could have called mr castle and asked what to do he could have walked away that was another more than that released value actually bought more insurance whether through a third party insurer or from a carrier and that the limitation of liability was not upheld and the recent years and that's critical there's no that goes there and it's critical because basically read write and change jewelry tell us and most recently came jewelry a few months ago that a fair opportunity does not mean the opportunity to buy the whole value that you would like to buy that was the holding of king jewelry and as i said some of these cases when you read them when you read about the seven hundred fifty thousand dollars of greyhound dogs in the darrow case when you read about the price spaniel in the clicker case when you read about all the things that get destroyed and lost in these cases you know it often  well and that of course shows i mean it well we're not hearing it today but the fact that insurance was fought and purchased shows that mr k asshole as the principal was quite aware of the opportunity to do so he was an experienced businessman he's shipped with us for many years and there was clear unnoticed here and at the point where the transaction was entered into there was a meeting of the mind did you understand that you were limited to five fifty eight and he answered of course i did and moreover with respect to the way bill the actual contracts are drawn since he testified at page twenty eight of his deposition record eighty four lines twelve through eighteen that after he had the conversation about the insurance was when he signed the wait till he can sign it before he signed it after the conversation and  stated that at that point in time the issue had not been resolved satisfactorily to him but he signed the way bill he signed the way the all knowing that he's not fluent in english the  notice whether or not noticed was actually given in that case the ninth circuit held in the opinion written by by judge william fletcher that the separate purchase of insurance simply cannot be reconciled with the contention that th shipper has been disadvantaged by a lost opportunity to pay more money in return for greater coverage because redirect did in fact separately purchase insurance covering damage it's clear that the limitation of liability to prove it didn't have a fair opportunity to make the purchase and then we jump to cain jewelry two thousand and three where it's through a carrier where they declare it in actually paid for thirty seven thousand and coverage but that he was restricted to the five fifty eight but he didn't refer to the rules and regulations of the deposition i'm not certain if he referred to the rules and regulations in the deposition where those rules and regulations anywhere in the record upfront their certainty known to both parties and it's proportionate to the payment for the service it's not a wild card to be determined after the fact if something goes wrong with the shipment it's all about certain case presents more compelling circumstances than came jewelry because they're the shipper left the transaction with federal express thinking they have thirty seven thousand dollars in coverage here belak got exactly what he paid for and u p s had no obligation to handle this package and it wouldn't have agreed to provide the service under the contract that castle was attempting to rewrite through the judicial process thank you paintings in the united states i don't know whether they would have had to pay a ukrainian export more money they may have but as far as far as they know they have no contracts they have no assurances the paintings w requires them to offer at least as much extra insurance as the tariff provides that's the issue before the court you know if you if you p s s you can ensure up to fifty thousand dollars per as the shipper can declare a higher value up to fifty thousand dollars per package in which case the shipper pays a higher rate based on the premium for insuring that amount and the maximum i didn't argue that you had to offer the amount up to the actual value of the item i merely said that they have to offer up to what their tariff provides is the maximum prepackage actual value of the item ship now this is i mean this is this is not unusual this is standard insurance language that you can't make a profit by by having you cast lose your item you've got to you've got to prove that it's actually worth sixty thousand sixty thousand would be a maximum value of the paintings actual proof at a trial might come out much might come out considerably less but if you were buying insurance you would you would want to buy it through the maximum value that came in they were and appraised it accurately that would be a tremendous burden on any carrier like u p s i don't think i mean i think there are crazy but one transaction which