try to get you your strongest neighbor saying that there is a mailbox there and mr khan was there and there is a doorbell there so they directly conflict it with the fireflies affidavit and at that point looking at conflicting statements just from those two cases was actually does ignited this case the mortgage come as a single family as we know now that it was a five unit apartment building so better on it and that's the mortgage companies information they put down they easily could pawn this is a minute billing rather than a single family so the record is clear over and above that with a lot of conflicting statements by within the statements by the plaintiff citibank and also by our the defendants about their affidavit and self and also the affidavit city has zero with the two other neighbors so the if you're looking at the total number of times and this is different you have the attempts which is one aspect of the equity directions and what he did the second place without a doorbell but here it's a requirement that the judge will look at the world court judge will look at the affidavit is because strict compliance with this service by publication must be false strictly and from a appointed by the court so you place reliance on that statement and the affidavit i know was on polish and you know i wasn't part of that panel but that's another our own conflicting statement and the affidavits by the process servers they were employed by professional legal service at that point they were our statements they were employed by firefly even amicus so within his own affidavit is a conflicting statement and so the trial court at that point should the citing you know when there's a lot of conflicting statements and the old affidavit us there's a lot of conflicting affidavits among the plaintiff statements case and the whaler certainly knew i had information about the application where the defendant would because that was something she needed to get through the neighborhood to get the apartment here is the same thing the mortgage company has information about where m it's each case is by itself and you have to look at the facts of each case in this case because he's a fire father looking at the portholes records just going to dorothy brown of looking at our website would see that he was named in a garbage that you could easily f about five minutes worth of investigation that he's working at the the fire of fire and which which fire station is looking at in call the fire house report that operates find out which stations i talk i'm on the phone talk as attorney worse a best  going through a divorce and all the asset and employment information are in a divorce records and the divorce is still going on so they could have asked his divorce attorneys because as you know other side they have done a number thing by simply making a search of the  mortgage inc strictly comply with section two six zero six a of the only cause of civil procedure when i've been called the publication statute that statute requires they have to cut service upon a defendant in a case i think that the the record shows a city mortgage determined mr carton's to addresses mr carden missiles were his two addresses there were nineteen attempts ten to nine to server those addresses the the temp said that the court this is not a case where play to fail to make diligent inquiry to ascertain defend his place of residence as required by the publication statute citi mortgage new mr collins residence th defendant said that i resided at that premises at the time the service was attempted between eight o'clock and six o'clock i was at work and the aerated it's eight o'clock i was at work and those are the various are very good specific hours any service by publication there is no presumption of service like in a personal service case so it's a comment upon the plaintiff seeking that relief from the court that they have that strict compliance with the statute for that type of service and those were all the cases are the more court case is the the new case that came out and that was the  and again that case was talking about the specificity of the affidavit affidavits by the process service that case just came out about a month ago in may i was a publisher sit down and they were talking about these specific af either and so to have the same similar result from that case it just came out but a month ago from this corner of the published cision the affidavits here are much musharraf's specific than the affidavits contained in that case that just came out about three years ago to three weeks ago their hearing are oh no i don't think there was a hearing at all in that case the court decided to vacate that without even having a hearing because it's again it's my position that even the most to reconsider and again the most reconsider showing the errors the court made and you can if the court sees that the hey i think given up an entry here and you know i should know we put that in my motion we consider adapt point the judge reading my motion then and it's been said a number of times you have to look at the world that the foreclosure judges all they hear is all day and that rule is specific to foreclosure cases that rule seven point three only says for closer cases hearing but the judge has determined and that's what that what he said and there's a conflict of the information and it's strict compliance with the statute we don't have to do a thing like a personal service cases for the opposite but here is they have must comply with the statute and they didn't they didn't get to that where we're all working even if they're kind in filing a affidavit as they do in city once of the courthouse and say they looked at his employment they didn't say anything like that the court could have looked at that they could say hey you want