In Engram v. Engram, 265 Ga. 804, 806 (2) (463 SE2d 12) (1995), the appellant rented a home from her ex-husband and his new wife. Id. at 804. According to the plaintiff, her ex-husband told her that if in the future, she wanted to purchase the house, her rent payments would be applied to the purchase price. Id. In 1984, the plaintiff spent $ 12,000 constructing an additional bedroom to the rented house. Id. In 1993, the ex-husband refused to honor the alleged oral option to purchase. Id. The plaintiff subsequently sued the ex-husband and his wife to specifically enforce the oral option to purchase, and, alternatively, for unjust enrichment, and the trial court granted summary judgment to the ex-husband and his wife. Id. On appeal, our Supreme Court concluded that the plaintiff's unjust enrichment claim was not barred by the statute of limitation, notwithstanding the fact that the improvements were made in 1984, because she "could not have known of the existence of a claim for unjust enrichment based on improvements to the property until 1993, when her ex-husband refused to honor the alleged oral option." Id. at 806 (2).