In Jim Anderson & Co. v. ParTraining Corp., 216 Ga. App. 344 (454 SE2d 210) (1995) the Court affirmed the trial court's denial of the insurance agent's motion for summary judgment on the ground that an issue of material fact existed regarding whether ParTraining, through its president, relied on the agent to provide expertise or exercise discretion in seeking to procure business interruption coverage. Id. at 345 (1). In ParTraining, the agent had discretion to adjust the policies, and even to change insurance policies without informing the company president. ParTraining is distinguishable from the instant case, however, because in that case, the company president testified that he asked for business interruption coverage and did not learn that the coverage was not included until after a fire destroyed the company's building. Id. at 344.