The mcallisters had several serious problems with their house, including leaks in the ceiling, a buckling wall, and dampness. they repaired the buckling wall by installing i-beams to support it but never resolved the leaks or the dampness. when they decided to sell the house, they said nothing to prospective buyers about the problems. if asked, they stated that the i-beam had been added for reinforcement. the silvas bought the house for $60,000 and immediately began to have problems with leaks, mildew, and dampness. are the silvas entitled to any money damages? a. yes, the silvas are entitled to damages for fraud because the mcallisters claimed the i-beams were added only for reinforcement, but cannot rescind the contract. b. yes, the silvas are entitled to rescind the contract due to fraud but are not entitled to damages. c. yes, the silvas are entitled to damages or to rescind the contract due to fraud, and possibly both. d. no, the silvas are not entitled to any remedy because the case does not constitute frau