In Miller v. Lemon, 194 W. Va. 129, 459 S.E.2d 406 (1995), the plaintiffs purchased a single insurance policy for coverage of two vehicles, a 1977 Ford Mustang and a 1988 Oldsmobile Delta Eighty-eight. The policy contained unambiguous anti-stacking language. The plaintiffs' previous insurance policy covered only the 1977 Ford Mustang, and the total policy premium was $ 136. Specifically, under the previous policy, the plaintiffs paid $ 122 for bodily injury liability coverage; $ 6 for medical payments coverage; $ 7 for uninsured motorists bodily injury coverage; and $ 1 for uninsured motorists property damage coverage. Premiums paid on the subsequent single multi-vehicle policy were $ 94 for bodily injury liability coverage; $ 5 for medical payments coverage; $ 7 for uninsured motorists bodily injury coverage; and $ 1 for uninsured motorists property damage coverage. Thus, the plaintiffs received a multi-car discount of $ 28 on each vehicle for bodily injury liability coverage and $ 1 on each vehicle for medical payments coverage, for a total premium discount on the entire policy of $ 58. The plaintiffs maintained, however, that because they received no discount specifically for uninsured motorist coverage, the anti-stacking provision was ineffective as to that coverage. The Court disagreed, and explained: Having contracted for only one policy of insurance, the Millers likewise bargained for only one uninsured motorist coverage endorsement. In return, Federal Kemper "assumed an increased risk of injury which could occur while the Millers were occupying the second vehicle as consideration for the second premium. The Millers were therefore receiving the benefit of that which they bargained for and should not receive more." (Miller, 194 W. Va. at 133, 459 S.E.2d at 410.) The Court recognized that anti-stacking language is valid and enforceable as to uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage where the insured purchases a single insurance policy to cover two or more vehicles and receives a multi-car discount on the policy premium. Specifically, the Court in Miller v. Lemon stated: "We conclude, therefore, that anti-stacking language in an automobile insurance policy is valid and enforceable as to uninsured and underinsured motorist coverage where the insured purchases a single insurance policy to cover two or more vehicles and receives a multi-car discount on the total policy premium." (Miller v. Lemon, 194 W. Va. at 133-134, 459 S.E.2d at 410-411.)