Supreme Court says that if an insurance agent mispresents the coverage you are buying, there is no cause of action unless the consumer can prove the insurance actually exists (what if the consumer would not have bought the insurance at all?).  In other words, if the misrepresentation is large enough (a statement contrary to what is possible in reality), there is no liability.  Since title to the Brooklyn Bridge cannot pass by individual sale, then if I "sell" it to a consumer, there is no DTPA claim, because the consumer cannot prove that title could have in fact passed.  The court also uses the "no insurance by estoppel" doctrine as a defense to the DTPA.

Metro-Allied Insruance Agency, Inc. v. Lin, 53 Tex.S.Ct.J. 174 (Tex. 2009).