The only thing this is once again is the 
insurance not all the rest.  If anybody brought 
in unrelevant information it is Nick.  The issue 
is insurance.  What is the real price of a 
transaction, Who started what ect ect is meaning 
less. The whole point ist hat he under insured.  
I am not slandering him but simply being factual 
by what he confessed too.  What I am doing is 
right becuase I am trying to get the right person 
to be responsible, it would be wrong if the buyer 
sufferes from Nick's mistake.  This is pretty 
simple.  It will clearly not get resolved on its 
own and this i why it is nessesary to have a 
judge hear the case.