When Margaret Tsallis telephoned her insurance broker on a March morning in 1976 to discuss coverage for her growing floral business in southwestern Ontario, she did not bring actuarial tables or policy comparison charts. She brought something far more common among business owners: trust. Margaret had operated Fine's Flowers for nearly a decade, expanding from a modest retail shop into a regional wholesaler with refrigeration units, delivery vehicles, and a small greenhouse attached to her main facility. She told her broker she wanted "full coverage" for the operation. The broker, whom she had worked with since purchasing her first commercial policy, assured her the matter would be handled. What Margaret did not know, and what her broker failed to investigate, was that her greenhouse operation created distinct insurable risks that her existing policy did not address. When a spring storm destroyed the greenhouse and the valuable inventory within it, Margaret discovered that her conception of "full coverage" and the actual policy her broker had placed diverged in ways that would cost her business tens of thousands of dollars. This scenario, and others like it across Ontario's commercial and personal insurance landscape, illuminates the central question of this lesson: what standards govern the communication between broker and client, and when does a client's reliance on a broker's expertise create heightened obligations that ordinary contract principles alone cannot capture.