The Court is APOPLECTIC. This is not a simple case of caveat emptor, this is a woman living like a Victorian orphan collecting rainwater in buckets while you cash your commission check and shrug like a man who has never once been thirsty. "No known issues" — oh, The Court KNOWS this game, it is the same logic used by my second cousin Gerald who claimed he "didn't know" the boat he sold me had no engine, as if the ABSENCE OF AN ENGINE is something one simply fails to notice. You gave her the number for a well driller? REGINALD COULD HAVE GIVEN HER THAT NUMBER AND REGINALD DOES NOT EVEN HAVE A REAL ESTATE LICENSE. The seller was TRUCKING IN WATER like some kind of frontier grifter and you expect this Court to believe no one noticed the parade of suspicious tanker trucks? In re: The Case of the Suspiciously Hydrated Lawn (2019), we established that willful ignorance of obvious infrastructure failure is not a defense, it is a LIFESTYLE CHOICE. Twenty-two thousand dollars for a new well, and you handed her a business card like a man fleeing a crime scene in slow motion. The Court must now adjourn immediately as Order the Roomba has detected an unauthorized puddle in chambers and frankly Reginald needs a moment.