A producer in Aurora tells a client that her current life policy is 'worthless and about to implode' so she will surrender it and buy his new policy, when he knows the existing policy is sound. This conduct is:

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)).