so i only went back a certain way and then in the reply relief by i got desperate of trying to find something in man is always something in that particular case memorialized in section one fifty four point sex and that is the part of it in by offering substantially less than the amounts ultimately recovered in suits my the you have a report of proceeding from december tenth two thousand and s it was a case of the insurance company denying liability under circumstances where they said there was a noncompliance with the statute of limitation but insurance company did not write proper  we were constantly in the situation in this trial where the per official of the defense was well in the first place this is can be a personal action under the insurance of section one fifty five is a personal can be the basis for a standard by which section one fifty five and the judge in this particular case i asked the defense counsel  was in the proper plain practice which can only be judged after the the a war is made and not at the time that the original offer of forty thousand finished that's the formula may be some of us do not like a formula like that or a cafe except the idea too easily but that's what the legislature show was a violation of section one fifty four when sex for this company not there but when the manual or any publications saying how to handle the first party fifty four point six a claim denial letter or offer of a compromise letter this supposed to be sent out i've never seen one in forty nine years ago in this personal injury  one once but that's just another factor to show that i don't think the folks who are running insurance companies are well aware of this section one hundred fifty one one strikes there must because i could not feel that i could cross examine people working for the insurance company with out all of the documents that were supposed to indicate the which liabilities become reasonably clear here so i'd like to point out that there are certain facts in this case that are in just beautiful one there wasn't an issue of liability number two i don't see how it's possible to say that there are any reasonable standards promulgated by the insurance company so i think that's factual there was no letter of explanation afterwards this was an incredibly complex the fairness of one fifty five that action which took an awful lot of effort the claim person involved was the principal person it was handling all these two hundred twenty two cases in terms of the substantially last issue every case can be defended in terms of the amount of the liability most cases are defended in a perfectly civil manner i don't believe that the magnitude of the loss and the totality of circumstances and bonafide defense and so forth low uses discretion in the result that he reached the plaintiff's cause of action which was brought under section one five five you heard a lot of discussion about this one fifty four that and i is not just say it ok every case that you're you have on war greater than what was offered nothing per se violation like counsel wants to argue they're looking for patterns that's why you don't see cases in forcing this on a private person talking to the doctors looking at bermondsey all of the things that you would do that you would for a reason that the trial court found that country was fully engaged in the process of and that is because they didn't settle because they offer he thought the case is really the true value is two hundred thirteen he's asking for four hundred thousand dollars of that event i think he said he asked for two hundred thousand more and he said those words he says the real value in this appeal is two hundred thirteen when they found what he's asking for way more than what he thinks it's worth it's it's that's the point of arbitration process to you where you just disagree you have the hearing you war and you end the war you less standard of section one fifty four point six he stands alone as the basis of recovery and of one fifty five in thinking about the question that i just ho widow who's just in her eighty's and has suffered a certain type of injury and if the insurance company wants to take a flyer in a case like this and see but if that doesn't work well then this penal statute says that the insurance companies just going to have to stand up for that and that's why we ask that you say that the elderly in this case should be the extra fifty eight thousand two hundred ninety five dollars that the plaintiff received or that they didn't offer and that she her legal fees pay for that arbitration which i've already paid for back and yes her arbitrator's costs