ÿWPC5 &¶`6s“*tëtK¢À1šJg¡«ÉÏ Ä+Le‹úWµ£nå°˜¥%Ðã×çjJ9w3À²l‰a>ªÔ[òiE™¼›8³NžÀo³.Ú“'ÒÁoq®aeݯ¬ª-~ ¯Ð=•á$è¼:7蔦a%ôm‰LFŠ¿õKщmZ|1¿0 ¡¡ŸMB»û¹¿ìWî¾c`¯ñì4Ô”¶~º&ɬþç>]¿¥ûEé“.ƒÜ¤ãîÃZ`;?ÑI¼Y7¿ÓnN“K+å=Z4“$ùv¥æç/|IýËÃÜB¡hÍÉ€ÉEóó¾¹; е‘Zpå7> sÕ[E62"X@ÿÃ.ªÎÑÎÚ?¢Ÿ%;ì2[¹øœ´,gâ€PÀ^;o«™A"›Ñhž=ta{«7Å]о;[ÎÂ&Cl(c›L“|çrÚU ÝßbÃ`‚€Ä3lN^æW‹[à!…èÝÁSVUZø`^2¼ Ì2®%>’r#_`VRMyô¨Qóÿ(eº|¯bÛÝ¡ŸHÄaœ ٵ㠢­z—"Š ì,ÆÖœÕבּí@Àd9ÚAí‹*3âÕWO7£81ÇY š[Mþ@»ú—oXÙ9ˆó‘¯bVüQZ7²þ¶b %\^ b 0ˆnUNöwD4H\ zkÒå· m¹ #ÁÐ 0D‘ ÆÕ Æ› Æa Æ'UNíN;= 1‡EEÌ 72Î; 1u; 72°æâÿÈ 0cÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇÇb************************************ 0ë2222 B 0¤: D3Þ D- 0K>> AS‰ÆÜ 0¤¢ 0DF A«Š»i¥‹+s (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular‰Q‡+¢Ø+00 3|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 8000 Series PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular (5hCEKQW]cioAutoList1I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I. 1Ý ƒR’Ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¨ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€Sampson€was€not€present€when€Ô_ÔPartonÔ_Ô€and€Defendant€entered€into€the€oral€agreement€or€during€theÐ ° Ðinstallation€of€the€new€unit.3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)i) ÜÝ ƒR’Ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¨ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€Roberts€and€Silva€testified€at€trial,€while€Phillips€and€Hill€testified€by€deposition€only.€ õÝ ƒR’Ä$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¨ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_Ô€€The€record€on€appeal€contains€a€document€entitled€ð ðProposalðð€which€contains€a€job€description€of€ð ðChangeÐ ° Ðout.ðð€€The€Proposal€further€states€as€follows:Ð tÄ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àHi€Tech€Heat€&€Air€will€remove€existing€(non„working)€heat€pump€and€replace€withÐ üL ÐJanitrol€3€ton€package€gas€heat€and€air€unit.ÐÀ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àHi€Tech€will€provide€additional€gas€line€to€fireplace€while€working€up€unit.ÐH ˜` x` x ÐÌThe€Proposal€states€that€the€total€price€for€material€and€labor€is€$3,200.€€The€Proposal€is€only€signed€by€Defendant.€€TheÐ Ð  Ðdocument€also€contains€a€box€captioned€ð ðAcceptance€of€Proposalðð€and€instead€of€Plaintiffsðð€signatures,€bears€the€notationÐ ” ä  Ðð ðJob€Approved€by€Telephone[.]ðð(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à- ù-(|G2’Ä$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€D»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôxò»»Ô d(|3…ä$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€D»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3…ä$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€D»»d d 8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€D» »d dÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼¥Ð»»»ÔÑ8€eôXXdê» »d 8ÑÑ  Ñ€à@ß ß ìà€Ô‡î½‘ ¥ÐÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼¥Ð» î#ԈРÖ& Ðà@44ìàOctober€16,€2001€SessionˆÐ üL ÐÔ‡Xç X»¼¥ÐÔÌÌÌò òÔ#†¼¥Ð» XXçþ#ÔÓ  Óà@@„„ ìàMICHAEL€BLAIN€SAMPSON,€òòet€al.óó€v.€BURL€WINNIE€d/b/a€WINNIE€à@@J J ìàÐ Ò " ÐHIGH€TECH€HEATING€AND€AIR€CONDITIONINGÔ‡Xç X»¼¥ÐÔó óÐ æ 6 ÐÓFÓÌÌò òà@ž ž ìàAppeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Ô_ÔRoaneÔ_Ô€County€ˆÐ Ò"  Ðà@Œ Œ ìàNo.€12051€€€€€€Russell€E.€Simmons,€Jr.,€JudgeˆÐ ¾  ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àFILED€DECEMBER€11,€2001Ð –æ  ÐßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ‚Ò  ÐÌà@ÏÏìàNo.€E2000„02268„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CVˆÐ }Í ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<T` AßÐ U¥ Ðó óÌÌÌÓÓÓÓMichael€Blain€Sampson€and€Grace€Ô_ÔPartonÔ_Ô€(ð ðPlaintiffsðð)€brought€suit€against€Burl€Winnie€d/b/aÐ (x ÐWinnie€High€Tech€Heating€and€Air€Conditioning€(ð ðDefendantðð),€alleging€breach€of€contract€andÐ d Ðviolation€of€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act.€€Defendant€installed€a€new€gas€heating€and€airÐ P Ðconditioning€unit€in€Plaintiffsðð€home,€and€shortly€thereafter,€Plaintiffs€became€dissatisfied€with€theÐ ì< Ðnew€unitððs€performance€and€Defendantððs€installation€of€the€unit.€€The€Trial€Court€dismissedÐ Ø( ÐPlaintiffsðð€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act€claim€but€awarded€Plaintiffs€damages€for€breach€ofÐ Ä Ðcontract€in€the€amount€of€$2,600.€€Plaintiffs€appeal.€€We€affirm.Ð ° ÐÌÌò òà@ÚÚìàTenn.€R.€App.€P.€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmed;ˆÐ t Ä Ðà@!!#ìàCase€Remanded.ó óˆÐ `!°  ÐòòÔ#†¼¥Ð» àXçñ#ÔÔ‡Xç X.¼¥ÐÔÌÌD.€Michael€Ô_ÔSwineyÔ_Ô,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòHouston€M.€Ô_ÔGoddardÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,óóÐ $$t# Ðand€òòHerschel€P.€Franks,€J.óó,€joined.Ð %` $ ÐÌÌDorothy€B.€Ô_ÔStulbergÔ_Ô€and€William€Allen,€Oak€Ridge,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellants,€Michael€BlainÐ Ô'$#' ÐSampson€and€Grace€Ô_ÔPartonÔ_Ô.Ð À($( ÐÌGary€L.€McDonald,€Kingston,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellee,€Burl€Winnie€d/b/a€Winnie€High€TechÐ ˜*è%* ÐHeating€and€Air€Conditioning.Ð „+Ô&+ ÐÓ™ÓÐ p,À',ý ÐÔ_Ôà@66'ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼¥Ð» XXçÊ #ÔÔ‡Xç X»¼¥ÐԈР° ÐòòóóÔ#†¼¥Ð» XXç #ÔÔ€Xç X»¼¥ÐÔà@ÛÛ%ìàò òòòBackgroundó óóóˆÐ ˆØ ÐÓÓà  àà ` àPlaintiffs,€Grace€Parton€and€Michael€Blain€Sampson,€are€mother€and€son.€€PartonÐ `° Ðpreviously€gave€a€deed€to€Sampson€for€her€home,€but€thereafter,€Parton€continued€to€reside€in€theÐ L œ Ðhouse.€€In€1996,€Parton€and€Defendant€entered€into€an€oral€agreement€in€which€Defendant€agreed€toÐ 8 ˆ Ðreplace€Plaintiffs'€electric€heating€and€air€conditioning€system€with€a€gas€unit€and€install€a€gas€lineÐ $ t Ðfor€her€fireplace.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€This€dispute€involves€only€the€installation€of€the€gas€heating€and€air€conditioningÐ  ` Ðunit.€€Although€Plaintiffsðð€existing€electrical€system€was€working€properly,€Plaintiffs€were€interestedÐ ü L  Ðin€converting€to€gas€heat€since€gas€utilities€had€recently€become€available€to€their€area.€€€Ð è 8  ÐÌà  àà ` àParton€testified€that€Defendant€told€her€that€her€old€2.5„ton€electrical€unit€(ð ðold€unitðð)Ð À  Ðwas€too€small€for€Plaintiffsðð€home.€€Plaintiffs€further€contend€that€Defendant€told€Parton€their€houseÐ ¬ü  Ðrequired€a€3„ton€gas€pack€central€system€which€was€a€combination€gas€furnace€and€electric€airÐ ˜è  Ðconditioner€("new€unit").€€Parton€testified€that€Defendant€planned€to€install€the€new€unit€at€the€frontÐ „Ô  Ðexterior€of€the€house,€near€the€location€of€old€unit€which€was€inside€a€closet€in€Plaintiffsðð€den.€Ð pÀ ÐParton€also€testified€Defendant€assured€her€he€would€install€a€good€unit€which€absolutely€wouldÐ \¬ Ðwork.€€The€parties'€agreement€was€silent€regarding€ductwork.€€It€is€undisputed€that€the€parties€agreedÐ H˜ Ðupon€a€price€of€$3,200€for€the€entire€job.€Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àà ` àShortly€after€the€parties€entered€into€their€agreement,€Defendant€appeared€at€Plaintiffs'Ð  \ Ðhome€and€requested€payment€of€the€entire€contract€price€of€$3,200.€€Plaintiffs€contend€that€DefendantÐ øH Ðtold€Parton€he€needed€the€money€to€purchase€a€truck.€€Parton€paid€Defendant€the€full€contract€priceÐ ä4 Ðdespite€the€fact€that€Defendant€had€not€completed€the€promised€work.€€ò òó óÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àShortly€thereafter,€Defendantððs€employees€installed€the€new€unit.€€Defendant€did€not,Ð ¨ø Ðhowever,€install€the€new€unit€at€the€front€exterior€of€the€house€as€promised,€but€instead,€installed€theÐ ”ä Ðunit€at€the€rear€of€the€house.€€Parton€contends€that€during€the€installation,€she€witnessed€DefendantððsÐ €Ð Ðemployees€knocking€out€a€wall€in€her€den,€and€that€they€told€her€Defendant€changed€his€mind€aboutÐ l¼ Ðwhere€the€new€unit€should€be€located.€€Plaintiff€denied€she€agreed€to€this€change€but€testified€sheÐ X ¨ Ðrelied€upon€Defendantððs€judgment.€€Ð D!” ÐÐ 0"€  Ðà  àà ` àAfter€Defendant€installed€the€new€unit,€Plaintiffs€became€dissatisfied.€€€€Plaintiffs'Ð ° Ðcomplaints€regarding€the€new€unit€involve:€(1)€the€size€of€the€new€unit;€(2)€location€and€installationÐ œì Ðof€the€new€unit;€(3)€installation€of€the€new€return€air€duct;€and€(4)€the€quality€of€Defendant'sÐ ˆØ Ðworkmanship.€€In€addition,€Plaintiffs€claim€the€new€unit€does€not€properly€heat€or€cool€their€houseÐ tÄ Ðand€that€as€a€result,€Plaintiffs€had€to€purchase€fans€and€space€heaters€to€assist€their€cooling€andÐ `° Ðheating€efforts.€Defendant€testified€that€after€the€project€was€finished,€the€new€unit€worked€properlyÐ L œ Ðand€Parton€was€happy€with€the€installation.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Р8 ˆ ÐÌà  àà ` àParton€testified€she€called€Defendant€with€her€complaints€as€frequently€as€two€to€threeÐ  ` Ðtimes€per€week.€€According€to€Plaintiffs,€Defendant€responded€to€her€calls€only€once€by€sending€twoÐ ü L  Ðemployees€who€told€Parton€to€turn€up€the€thermostat€if€she€was€cold.€€Defendant,€however,€claimsÐ è 8  Ðthat€Parton€telephoned€him€only€once€and€that€a€service€call€was€made€in€response.€€According€toÐ Ô$  ÐDefendant,€the€service€call€showed€no€problems€with€the€new€unit.€€Moreover,€Defendant€testifiedÐ À  Ðthat€some€time€after€receiving€Plaintiffsðð€complaints,€he€offered€Plaintiffs€one„half€of€their€contractÐ ¬ü  Ðprice,€$1,600.€€Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiff€presented€the€testimony€of€four€expert€witnesses€at€trial:€€William€Sylvia,Ð pÀ ÐDavid€Roberts,€Lee€Phillips€and€Shannon€Hill.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Three€of€these€witnesses,€Sylvia,€Roberts€andÐ \¬ ÐPhillips,€provided€an€opinion€about€the€size€of€the€new€unit.€€€All€three€testified€that€the€new€unit€isÐ H˜ Ðtoo€large€for€Plaintiffs'€home€and€that€the€size€of€the€new€unit€is€not€compatible€with€the€existingÐ 4„ Ðductwork.Ð  p ÐÌà  àà ` àWilliam€Sylvia,€Partonððs€brother,€testified€the€new€unit€requires€an€upgrade€of€theÐ øH Ðductwork€because€the€new€unit€cannot€get€enough€cubic€feet€of€air€through€the€existing€ductwork.€Ð ä4 ÐSylvia€further€opined€that€the€new€return€air€duct€installed€by€Defendant€is€too€small€for€the€new€unit.Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àDavid€Roberts€testified€there€was€no€way€the€new€unit,€as€installed€by€Defendant,Ð ¨ø Ðcould€adequately€heat€and€cool€the€house.€€Roberts€further€opined€that€the€too„large€new€unit€resultsÐ ”ä Ðin€shorter€run€cycles€which,€in€turn,€shortens€the€life€of€the€unit,€makes€the€home€less€comfortable,Ð €Ð Ðand€results€in€higher€humidity€and€lower€operating€efficiency.€€Roberts€testified€that€if€he€wereÐ l¼ Ðinstalling€the€3„ton€unit€in€Plaintiffsðð€home,€he€would€have€to€replace€all€of€the€existing€ductworkÐ X ¨ Ðwhich€Roberts€estimated€would€cost€between€$1,800€and€$2,200.€€Roberts€testified€that€even€afterÐ D!” Ðreplacing€the€existing€ductwork,€the€new€3„ton€unit€would€still€be€too€large€for€Plaintiffsðð€home€andÐ 0"€  Ðcause€problems€with€the€efficiency€and€life€of€the€unit.Ð #l! ÐÌà  àà ` àAnother€of€Plaintiffsðð€expert€witnesses,€Lee€Phillips,€is€a€general€home€inspector€butÐ ô$D # Ðnot€licensed€in€heating€and€air.€€Phillips€testified€the€old€and€new€units€are€totally€different€withÐ à%0!$ Ðrespect€to€the€way€they€are€ducted.€€Phillips€also€opined€that€it€was€rare€to€replace€an€existing€heatingÐ Ì&"% Ðand€air€unit€with€a€larger€one.€€Phillips€testified€that€the€new€unit€was€poorly€installed€and€wasÐ ° Ðinadequate€to€efficiently€heat€and€cool€Plaintiffsðð€home.€€Ð œì ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€contrast,€Defendant€testified€that€Plaintiffsðð€home€is€uncomfortable€with€the€newÐ tÄ Ðunit€because€of€the€existing€ductwork€which€he€characterized€as€old€and€poorly€installed.€€DefendantÐ `° Ðfurther€testified€that€a€replacement€of€the€Plaintiffsðð€existing€duct€system€would€require€tearing€outÐ L œ Ðsheetrock€which€was€not€within€the€parameters€of€the€partiesðð€contract.€€Defendant€maintained€thatÐ 8 ˆ Ðhe€was€hired€only€to€perform€a€change„out€of€the€heating€and€air€system,€not€a€replacement€of€theÐ $ t Ðduct€system.€Defendant,€however,€testified€he€had€to€install€a€new€return€air€duct€to€avoid€having€toÐ  ` Ðtear€out€the€existing€return.€€Defendant€testified€that€ð ðthe€duct€work€we€had€to€do€was€really€difficultÐ ü L  Ðto€try€to€do[.]€€€[W]e€had€a€heck€of€a€lot€of€man€hours€and€a€lot€of€work€to€try€to€get€it€to€where€itÐ è 8  Ðwould€work.ðð€€The€record€shows€that€Defendantððs€testimony€regarding€the€cost€associated€with€theÐ Ô$  Ðreplacement€of€the€ductwork€was€consistent€with€Robertsðð€estimate€as€Defendant€first€opined€the€costÐ À  Ðwould€be€$2,100€and€later€testified€it€would€be€$1,800.€€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiffs€claim€their€expert€witness€testimony€established€that€Defendant€installedÐ „Ô  Ðthe€new€unit€in€the€wrong€location€in€the€house.€€The€old€unit€was€located€in€a€central€location€ofÐ pÀ ÐPlaintiffs'€home€whereas€Defendant€installed€the€new€unit€in€the€rear€of€the€house.€€Phillips€testifiedÐ \¬ Ðthe€location€of€the€new€unit€at€the€opposite€end€of€the€house€caused€the€system€to€work€harder€toÐ H˜ Ðforce€air€through€the€ductwork.€€Defendant,€on€the€other€hand,€testified€the€new€unit€could€not€beÐ 4„ Ðplaced€in€the€location€of€the€old€unit€because€the€new€unit€could€not€be€vented€out€of€the€home.€€InÐ  p Ðaddition,€Plaintiffs€complain€about€Defendantððs€locating€the€new€return€air€duct€on€the€ceiling€ofÐ  \ ÐPlaintiffs'€den€since,€among€other€things,€the€new€return€air€duct€was€not€centrally€located€in€theirÐ øH Ðhome€as€it€should€have€been,€resulting€in€a€temperature€differential€between€the€upstairs€andÐ ä4 Ðdownstairs€levels.€€Ð Ð  ÐÌà  àà ` àMoreover,€Plaintiffs€raise€issues€about€the€quality€of€Defendantððs€workmanshipÐ ¨ø Ðregarding€a€number€of€matters,€including€the€new€return€air€duct€located€in€their€den.€€PlaintiffsÐ ”ä Ðcontend€the€silver€return€air€duct€is€unsightly€and€hangs€from€the€denððs€ceiling,€interfering€with€theirÐ €Ð Ðuse€and€enjoyment€of€their€den.€€Furthermore,€Plaintiffs€contend€their€denððs€wood€paneling€wasÐ l¼ Ðshoddily€cut€by€Defendant€during€the€installation€of€the€new€return€air€duct.€€Defendant,€however,Ð X ¨ Ðcontends€that€Parton€was€informed€of€the€installation€and€location€of€the€new€return€air€duct€andÐ D!” Ðagreed€to€it.Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àà ` àOne€of€Plaintiffsðð€expert€witnesses,€Shannon€Hill,€a€licensed€contractor,€prepared€anÐ $X" Ðestimate€for€Plaintiffs€regarding€how€much€it€would€cost€to€place€Plaintiffsðð€home€in€the€conditionÐ ô$D # Ðit€was€in€prior€to€Defendantsðð€installation€of€the€new€unit.€€Hill€testified€he€based€his€estimate€uponÐ à%0!$ Ðwhat€Parton€requested,€which€included€removing€the€new€return€air€duct€in€the€den,€removing€theÐ Ì&"% Ðnew€unit,€and€repairing€the€wallsðð€damage.€€Hillððs€estimate€for€materials€and€labor€totaled€$2,100.€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiffs€filed€suit€in€March€1998€against€Defendant€in€Roane€County€GeneralÐ )à$( ÐSessions€Court€for€breach€of€contract,€alleging€unspecified€damages€under€$15,000.€€Plaintiffs'€CivilÐ |*Ì%) ÐWarrant€states€that€Plaintiffs€contracted€with€Defendant€to€install€a€heat€and€air€conditioning€unit€inÐ h+¸&* Ðtheir€home€but€that€the€unit€Defendant€installed€was€not€properly€installed€and€that€the€unit€did€notÐ ° Ðproperly€function.€€Thereafter,€in€October€1998,€Plaintiffs€filed€an€Amended€Warrant€in€GeneralÐ œì ÐSessions€Court€to€include€violations€of€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act€(ð ðTCPAðð)€and€theÐ ˆØ ÐUniform€Commercial€Code.€€The€General€Sessions€Court€held€a€trial€and€awarded€Plaintiffs€$2,150.€Ð tÄ ÐPlaintiffs€appealed€òòde€novoóó€to€the€Trial€Court.Ð `° ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€òòde€novoóóappeal,€the€trial€was€held€in€April€2000.€€The€Trial€Court€awardedÐ 8 ˆ ÐPlaintiffs€breach€of€contract€damages€in€the€amount€of€$2,600€plus€court€costs.€€The€Trial€CourtÐ $ t Ðdismissed€Plaintiffs'€TCPA€claim.€€The€Trial€Court€made€no€specific€mention€of€Plaintiffsðð€UniformÐ  ` ÐCommercial€Code€claim€and€Plaintiffs€raise€no€issue€on€appeal€concerning€any€claim€under€theÐ ü L  ÐUniform€Commercial€CodeÐ è 8  ÐÌà  àà ` àWhile€the€Order€contained€no€findings€of€fact,€the€record€on€appeal€contains€the€TrialÐ À  ÐCourtððs€notes€(ð ðNotesðð)€which€contains€findings€of€fact.€€According€to€Plaintiffsðð€brief€on€appeal,Ð ¬ü  Ðthe€Trial€Courtððs€Notes€were€originally€handwritten€and€later€typed€by€the€parties.€€Plaintiff,€byÐ ˜è  Ðmotion,€asked€the€Trial€Court€to€order€the€typed€copy€of€the€Trial€Courtððs€Notes€forming€the€basisÐ „Ô  Ðfor€the€Courtððs€findings€be€made€a€part€of€the€record.€€The€Trial€Court€granted€Plaintiffsðð€motion€andÐ pÀ Ðordered€that€ð ðthe€notes€forming€the€basis€of€the€Courtððs€findings€.€.€.€be€added€to€the€record.ðð€€TheÐ \¬ Ðrecord€on€Appeal€contains€the€typed€version€of€the€Notes,€and€apparently,€the€parties€agree€on€appealÐ H˜ Ðthat€these€Notes€reflect,€as€ordered€by€the€Trial€Court,€the€findings€of€fact€by€the€Trial€Court.€€TheÐ 4„ ÐTrial€Courtððs€Notes€provide€the€following:Ð  p ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€Court€finds€from€the€evidence€that€the€parties€enteredÐ øH Ð[sic]€an€oral€contract€in€which€Plaintiff€was€to€pay€$3,200.00€toÐ ä4 ÐDefendant,€and€Defendant€was€to€supply€material€and€labor€andÐ Ð  Ðinstall€a€gas€unit€for€heating€and€air€conditioning€that€would€beÐ ¼  Ðadequate€for€the€vendor€[sic].Шø` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àPresence€of€Mrs.€Parton€ð!ð€she€acquiesced€in€change€from€frontÐ €Ð Ðyard€to€back€and€modifications€in€den.€€Mr.€Winnie€had€superiorÐ l¼ Ðknowledge€as€to€fitting€the€unit€to€the€system.ÐX ¨` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€Court€finds€that€there€was€breech€[sic]€of€contract€as€toÐ 0"€  Ðthe€relationship€in€that€the€unit€and€the€modifications€to€the€ductworkÐ #l! Ðdid€not€allow€adequate€airflow,€and€the€Court€further€finds€theÐ $X" ÐPlaintiffs€did€not€sustain€their€burden€of€proof€as€to€aÐ ô$D # Ðmisrepresentation€or€fraudulent€conduct€on€the€part€of€the€Defendant.Ðà%0!$` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àMs.€Parton,€as€agent€for€Mr.€Sampson€as€I€said€before,€bearsÐ ¸'#& Ðsome€responsibility€for€entering€a€verbal€contract€and€allowing€theÐ ¤(ô#' ÐDefendant€to€continue€work€if€she€felt€it€was€contrary€to€theÐ )à$( Ðagreement.Ð|*Ì%)` x` x ÐÐ h+¸&* Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€Court€finds€that€the€Plaintiffs€should€receive€judgment€forÐ ° Ð$2,100.00€which€is€the€value€of€installing€new€ductwork,€and€$500.00Ð œì Ðfor€damage€to€the€unit€be€[sic]€its€use€with€the€inadequate€ductwork,Ð ˆØ Ðfor€a€total€judgment€of€$2,600.00€plus€court€costs.ÐtÄ` x` x ÐÌPlaintiffs€appeal.Ð L œ ÐÌà0  àà ° àà0(#(#àà ° àà@))%ì(#(#àò òòòDiscussionó óóóˆÐ $ t ÐÌà  àà ` àPlaintiffs€present€two€issues€for€review€in€this€appeal.€€We€quote€these€issues€fromÐ ü L  ÐPlaintiffsðð€brief€as€follows:Ð è 8  ÐÌÓ€ (5h83ÓÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£MLÝÔ25hÔÚ  ÚIÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThe€Trial€Court€erred€in€dismissing€Appellantsðð€claim€thatÐ À  ÐAppellee€violated€the€Tennessee€Consumer€Protection€Act.݃3£MLšL݌Ьü ¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌÝ"‚3£"ÝÝ  Ýà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÝ‚3£ÉMÝÔ25hÔÚ  ÚIIÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` x` xàÝ  ÝThe€Trial€Courtððs€award€of€damages€was€insufficient€toÐ „Ô  Ðcompensate€Appellants€for€Appelleeððs€breach€of€contract.݃3£ÉMNÝŒÐpÀ¸ x¸ x ÐŒÝ  ÝÌà  àà ` àDefendant€raises€no€specific€issues€on€appeal€but€argues€that€the€Trial€Court€correctlyÐ H˜ Ðdismissed€Plaintiffsðð€TCPA€claim.€€Defendant€contends€that€€Plaintiffs€failed€to€carry€their€burdenÐ 4„ Ðof€proof€regarding€their€TCPA€claim.€Ð  p ÐÌà  àà ` àOur€review€is€òòde€novoóó€upon€the€record,€accompanied€by€a€presumption€of€correctnessÐ øH Ðof€the€findings€of€fact€of€the€Trial€Court,€unless€the€preponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.Ð ä4 ÐTenn.€Rule€App.€P.€13(d);òò€Alexander€v.€Inman,€óó974€S.W.2d€689,€692€(Tenn.€1998).€€A€Trial€CourtððsÐ Ð  Ðconclusions€of€law€are€subject€to€a€òòde€novoóó€review€with€no€presumption€of€correctness.€€òòGanzevoortÐ ¼  Ðv.€Russell,€óó949€S.W.2d€293,€296€(Tenn.€1997).€€ò òòòóóó óWith€respect€to€the€Trial€Courtððs€decision€not€toÐ ¨ø Ðaward€Plaintiffs€the€remedy€of€rescission€as€part€of€their€damages,€we€will€review€this€decision€usingÐ ”ä Ðan€abuse€of€discretion€standard.€€òòWilkey€v.€Rhea€County,€óóNo.€E1999„00307„COA„R3„CV,€2000€WLÐ €Ð Ð782011,€at€*€3€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€June€20,€2000),€òòno€appl.€perm.€app.€filedóó;€òòVakil€v.€Idnanióó,€748€S.W.2dÐ l¼ Ð196,€199„200€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1987).ò ò€€ó óWe€should€not€reverse€for€ð ðððabuse€of€discretionðð€aÐ X ¨ Ðdiscretionary€judgment€of€a€trial€court€unless€it€affirmatively€appears€that€the€Trial€Courtððs€decisionÐ H!˜ Ðwas€against€logic€or€reasoning,€and€caused€an€injustice€or€injury€to€the€party€complaining.ðððð€€òòMarcusÐ 4"„  Ðv.€Marcus,óó€993€S.W.2d€596,€601€(Tenn.€1999)€(quoting€òòBallard€v.€Herzkeóó,€924€S.W.2d€652,€661Ð  #p! Ð(Tenn.€1996)).ò òòòÐ  $\" Ðó óóóÌà  àà ` àWe€first€address€Plaintiffsðð€argument€on€appeal€regarding€the€Trial€Courtððs€dismissalÐ ä%4!$ Ðof€their€TCPA€claim.€€The€purpose€of€the€TCPA€is€provided€by€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„102,€inÐ Ð& "% Ðpertinent€part,€as€follows:Ð ¼' #& ÐÌà8  ààHàˆà8` Ð Ð àThe€provisions€of€this€part€shall€be€liberally€construed€to€promote€theÐ ”)ä$( Ðfollowing€policies:Ѐ*Ð%)` x` x ÐÐ l+¼&* Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(2)€To€protect€consumers€.€.€.€from€those€who€engage€in€unfair€orÐ ° Ðdeceptive€acts€or€practices€in€the€conduct€of€any€trade€or€commerceÐ œì Ðin€part€or€wholly€within€this€state;ЈØ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(3)€To€encourage€and€promote€the€development€of€fair€consumerÐ `° Ðpractices;ÐL œ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à(4)€To€declare€and€to€provide€for€civil€legal€means€for€maintainingÐ $ t Ðethical€standards€of€dealing€between€persons€engaged€in€business€andÐ  ` Ðthe€consuming€public€to€the€end€that€good€faith€dealings€betweenÐ ü L  Ðbuyers€and€sellers€.€.€.€be€had€in€this€state€.€.€.€.Ðè 8 ` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€TCPA€provides€for€a€private€right€of€action€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„Ð À  Ð109(a)(1),€as€follows:Ð ¬ü  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àAny€person€who€suffers€an€ascertainable€loss€of€money€or€property,Ð „Ô  Ðreal,€personal,€or€mixed,€.€.€.€as€a€result€of€the€use€or€employment€byÐ pÀ Ðanother€person€of€an€òòunfair€or€deceptive€act€or€practice€declared€toÐ \¬ Ðbe€unlawful€by€this€partóó,€may€bring€an€action€individually€to€recoverÐ H˜ Ðactual€damages.€Ð4„` x` x ÐÌ(emphasis€added).€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„104(b)€provides€an€extensive€list€of€ð ðunfair€orÐ  \ Ðdeceptive€acts€or€practices€.€.€.€declared€to€be€unlawful€and€in€violation€of€this€part.€.€.€.ðð€€A€personÐ øH Ðmay€recover€actual€damages€under€the€TCPA€for€negligent€conduct€if€the€necessary€elements€of€aÐ ä4 ÐTCPA€claim€are€satisfied.€€òò€Smith€v.€Scott€Lewis€Chevrolet,€Inc.óó,€843€S.W.2d€9,€12„13€(Tenn.€Ct.Ð Ð  ÐApp.€1992).€€Moreover,€a€trial€court€may€award€the€buyer€reasonable€attorneyððs€fees€and€costs€forÐ ¼  Ða€violation€of€the€TCPA.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„109(e)(1).Ð ¨ø ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€TCPA€also€provides€for€recovery€of€treble€the€amount€of€actual€damages€andÐ €Ð Ðð ðsuch€other€relief€as€[the€court]€considers€necessary€and€properðð€in€the€event€the€court€finds€theÐ l¼ Ðsellerððs€ð ðunfair€or€deceptive€act€or€practice€was€a€willful€or€knowing€violation€of€this€part.€.€.€.ðð€Ð X ¨ ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„109(a)(3).€The€TCPA€provides€a€definition€of€ð ðknowingðð€as€follows:Ð D!” ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àð ðKnowinglyðð€or€ð ðknowingðð€means€actual€awareness€of€the€falsity€orÐ #l! Ðdeception,€but€actual€awareness€may€be€inferred€where€objectiveÐ $X" Ðmanifestations€indicate€that€a€reasonable€person€would€have€knownÐ ô$D # Ðor€would€have€had€reason€to€know€of€the€falsity€or€deception€.€.€.Ðà%0!$` x` x ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€47„18„103(6).Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àà ` à€On€appeal,€Plaintiffs€contend€the€Trial€Court€erred€in€dismissing€their€TCPA€claimÐ )à$( Ðand€in€failing€to€award€Plaintiffs€treble€damages€and€attorneyððs€fees.€€We€find€no€error€in€the€TrialÐ |*Ì%) ÐCourtððs€dismissal€of€this€claim.€€The€evidence€in€the€record€on€appeal€does€not€preponderate€againstÐ h+¸&* Ðthe€Trial€Courtððs€findings€and€resulting€determination€that€Plaintiffs€did€not€establish€thatÐ ° ÐDefendantððs€conduct€amounted€to€an€unfair€or€deceptive€act€or€practice€in€violation€of€the€TCPA.€Ð œì ÐòòSee€óóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€47„18„104(b);€47„18„109(a)(1).€€The€proof€in€the€record€establishes,€asÐ ˆØ Ðfound€by€the€Trial€Court,€that€Defendant€failed€to€install€a€new€gas€heating€and€air€conditioning€unitÐ tÄ Ðthat€was€compatible€with€Plaintiffsðð€existing€ductwork,€and€that€this€was€a€breach€of€contract€by€theÐ `° ÐDefendant.€€While€a€plaintiff€may€recover,€under€certain€circumstances,€for€negligence€under€theÐ L œ ÐTCPA,€a€review€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€47„18„104(b)(1)„(33)€shows€that€Defendantððs€breach€ofÐ 8 ˆ Ðcontract€as€proven€by€Plaintiffs€does€not€constitute€a€violation€of€the€TCPA.€€òòSee€Smith€v.€Scott€LewisÐ $ t ÐChevrolet,€Inc.óó,€843€S.W.2d€at€12„13.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€Trial€Courtððs€dismissal€ofÐ  ` ÐPlaintiffsðð€TCPA€claim.€Consequently,€Plaintiffsðð€claim€for€relief€under€the€TCPA,€includingÐ ü L  Ðrecission,€treble€damages,€and€attorneyððs€fees,€is€without€merit.€€€Ð è 8  ÐÌòòò òà  àó óóóà0 ` àPlaintiffsðð€second€issue€on€appeal€concerns€the€Trial€Courtððs€award€of€damages€in€theÐÀ ` (#` (# Ðamount€of€$2,600.€€Plaintiffs€assert€that€this€award€of€$2,600€is€insufficient€to€compensate€them€forÐ ¬ü  ÐDefendantððs€breach€of€contract.€€The€Trial€Courtððs€Notes€provide€that€the€$2,600€award€includesÐ ˜è  Ð$2,100€for€the€cost€of€installing€new€ductwork€and€$500€ð ðfor€damage€to€the€be€[sic]€its€use€with€theÐ „Ô  Ðinadequate€ductwork.€.€.€.ðð€€Plaintiffs€contend€that€$2,600€is€not€sufficient€and€that€the€Trial€CourtÐ pÀ Ðshould€have€awarded€a€total€of€$5,600€which€includes:€(1)€the€contract€price€of€$3,200;€(2)€the€costÐ \¬ Ðof€repairs€to€their€home€associated€with€the€removal€of€the€new€unit€and€return€air€duct€and€repairsÐ H˜ Ðto€the€walls€and€paneling€in€the€amount€of€$2,100;€(3)€and€Plaintiffsðð€out„of„pocket€expenses€for€newÐ 4„ Ðfans€and€space€heaters€in€the€amount€of€$300.€Ð  p ÐÌà  àà ` àAlthough€neither€the€Order€nor€the€Trial€Courtððs€Notes€directly€state€as€such,€theÐ øH Ðdifference€between€the€amount€Plaintiffs€request€for€their€damages€and€the€amount€awarded€by€theÐ ä4 ÐTrial€Court€results€from€the€Trial€Courtððs€determination€that€the€contract€should€not€be€rescinded€andÐ Ð  Ðthe€new€unit€removed,€but€rather€that€the€existing€ductwork€should€be€upgraded€so€as€to€beÐ ¼  Ðcompatible€with€the€new€unit.€€This€determination€hinged€upon€the€testimony€of€witnesses,€includingÐ ¨ø ÐPlaintiffsðð€expert€witnesses.€€The€proof€in€the€record€shows€that€one€of€Plaintiffsðð€expert€witnesses,Ð ”ä ÐDavid€Roberts,€testified€the€larger,€new€unit€required€the€existing€ductwork€be€upgraded.€€Further,Ð €Ð ÐDefendant€testified€the€existing€ductwork€was€old€and€poorly€installed.€€In€addition,€Roberts€testifiedÐ l¼ Ðthat€the€cost€associated€with€upgrading€the€ductwork€was€between€$1,800€and€$2,200,€whileÐ X ¨ ÐDefendant€testified€the€cost€would€be€either€$1,800€or€$2,100.€€We€acknowledge€that€three€ofÐ D!” ÐPlaintiffsðð€expert€witnesses,€including€Roberts,€testified€that€the€new€3„ton€unit€was€too€large€forÐ 0"€  ÐPlaintiffsðð€home€and€that€Roberts€testified€that€even€if€the€ductwork€were€upgraded,€the€new€unitÐ #l! Ðwould€still€be€too€large€for€Plaintiffsðð€home€which€would€affect€the€unitððs€efficiency€and€life.€€TheÐ $X" ÐTrial€Court€took€this€into€consideration€when€it€€awarded€Plaintiff€$500€for€damages€to€the€unit€itselfÐ ô$D # Ðresulting€from€use€with€inadequate€ductwork.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€Trial€Court€ð ðwas€in€the€best€position€to€evaluate€[the€witnessesðð]€credibilityÐ ¸'#& Ð[since]€ð ð[u]nlike€this€Court,€the€[T]rial€[C]ourt€observed€the€manner€and€demeanor€of€the€witnessesÐ ¤(ô#' Ð.€.€.€.ðð€€òòUnion€Planters€Natððl€Bank€v.€Island€Mgmt.€Auth.,€Inc.óó,€43€S.W.3d€498,€502€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ð )à$( Ð2000).€€The€Trial€Courtððs€determinations€regarding€credibility€are€accorded€deference€by€this€Court.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐòòId.óó;òò€Davis€v.€Liberty€Mutual€Ins.€Co.óó,€38€S.W.3d€560,€563€(Tenn.€2001).€€ð ð[A]ppellate€courts€willÐ h+¸&* Ðnot€re„evaluate€a€trial€judgeððs€assessment€of€witness€credibility€absent€clear€and€convincing€evidenceÐ ° Ðto€the€contrary.ðð€òòWells€v.€Tennessee€Bd.€of€Regentsóó,€9€S.W.3d€779,€783€(Tenn.€1999).€€Accordingly,Ð œì Ðin€light€of€the€deference€we€must€give€the€Trial€Courtððs€determinations€of€credibility,€we€find€noÐ ˆØ Ðerror€with€the€Trial€Courtððs€conclusion€that€the€proper€measure€of€damages€for€Defendantððs€breachÐ tÄ Ðof€contract€was€the€cost€of€upgrading€Plaintiffsðð€existing€ductwork€plus€an€additional€$500€forÐ `° Ðdamages€associated€with€the€use€of€the€new€unit€with€the€existing€inadequate€ductwork€rather€thanÐ L œ Ðrescission€with€damages€being€the€costs€of€removing€the€new€unit€and€making€repairs€to€the€wallsÐ 8 ˆ Ðand€paneling.€€We€believe€the€Trial€Court€applied€the€proper€measure€of€damages€relevant€toÐ $ t ÐPlaintiffsðð€breach€of€contract€claim,€and€that€the€evidence€in€the€record€before€us€does€notÐ  ` Ðpreponderate€against€the€Trial€Courtððs€finding€as€to€the€amount€necessary€to€place€the€Plaintiffs€inÐ ü L  Ðthe€condition€they€would€have€been€had€Defendant€not€breached€the€contract.€Ð è 8  ÐÌò òòòóóó óà@  %ìàò òòòConclusionóóó óˆÐ À  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€judgment€of€the€Trial€Court€is€affirmed,€and€this€cause€is€remanded€to€the€TrialÐ ˜è  ÐCourt€for€such€further€proceedings€as€may€be€required,€if€any,€consistent€with€this€Opinion,€and€forÐ „Ô  Ðcollection€of€the€costs€below.€€The€costs€on€appeal€are€assessed€against€the€Appellants,€Michael€BlainÐ pÀ ÐSampson€and€Grace€Parton,€and€their€surety.Ð \¬ Ðò òó óÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð øH Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àD.€MICHAEL€SWINEY,€JUDGE