Producer Marcelle Duane in Boulder tells a client that her current life policy is 'worthless' and urges her to let it lapse and replace it, mainly so Marcelle can earn a new commission. Which unfair practice is this?

Why A is correct

C.R.S. 10-3-1104(1)(a) prohibits misrepresenting policy facts to induce a policyholder to lapse, forfeit, exchange, convert, or surrender insurance - Colorado's twisting prohibition. Earning a new commission is the classic motive, and the false statement about the existing policy's value completes the violation.

Why the other options are wrong

• B) Nothing of value was offered back to the policyholder; the inducement was the false statement, not a rebate.
• C) Unfair claim settlement provisions govern claim handling, and no claim exists in this scenario.
• D) No economic pressure or boycott was used; the tool was misrepresentation about the policy.

Memory hook

Twisting = lying a policy into the grave.

Why C is correct

C.R.S. § 10-3-1104(1)(a) prohibits misrepresenting a policy's terms to induce a lapse, forfeiture, exchange, conversion, or surrender — Colorado's twisting hook. Knowingly false statements designed to trigger a replacement are the violation itself, regardless of whether the paperwork is signed or a later refund right exists. Defamation under C.R.S. § 10-1-116 instead concerns false statements about another person's or company's financial condition.

Why the other options are wrong

• A) A replacement built on misrepresentation is unlawful no matter who signs what.
• B) The statement attacks the client's own policy, not a competitor's financial condition, so the defamation provision does not fit.
• D) The free-look period is a cancellation right, not a license to induce a surrender through lies.

Memory hook

Trashing a sound policy to force a swap is twisting (§ 10-3-1104(1)(a)).