but, perhaps, the most galling is the claim that we have a udu in our home. mr. patterson made this claim in his letter and mr. winslow research confirmed this is a lie. what they are doing is accusing the prior owners of our home of defrauding us when they sold us the house. it's worthwhile to note mr. patterson has used this tactic before. he appeared before you in february in 743 vermont street using the same language verbatim to you that he used in that case. the argument was far-fetched there and utterly preposterous here. the ginstonis are making these claims on issues with no relevance to their project, north facing property line windows. i'm happy to answer my questions. we spent a lot of time researching the history of the home, as well. thank you. >> thank you. >> commissioner richards, how can you go out and do a site visit and see no evidence of a three-unit building because of the original construction, et cetera and have us be presented with data that it was a three-unit building and how could it go from a three to a one? what do you think happened?