This is the tape of brief example Clarkson v. Orkin Exterminating Co ., Ine, Facts: Mrs. Clarkson purchased a house that Orkin had contracted with her predecessor in title to retreat the house in the event that the termites and the moisture problems developed. On the process of selling the house, Mrs. Clarkson incurred the cost of repairing the moisture problem and the termites that caused water damage to the draining system. Issue: Did Orkin behavior violate the unfair Trade Practices Act? Holding: No, the South Carolina Unfair Trade Practices Act may be violated only if the presentation was to the capacity or effect or tendency to deceive. However, in the case presented, Mrs. Clarkson knew the true state of affairs and Orkin's certification had no tendency to repair the work done. Therefore, there is no support In the South Carolina law for the proposal that a service person violates the unjust trade practice if he does his work badly or overlooks something which might have fascinated his attention. Reasoning: Mrs. Clarkson was entitled to a proper performance by Orkin of its contract, which was to check and treat again if an invasion was found. That promise was not correctly performed, and Mrs. Clarkson is unrestricted to any damage she suffered by the motive that non-performance. because she knew of the termite invasion one day after Orkin failed to notice it, her damage would actually be limited to the cost of the examination by the other exterminator plus the cost of any retreatment she might have procured. \f\f\f\f