A Georgia insurer threatens policyholders with cancellation of their coverage unless they drop their independent agents and deal directly with the company. Which unfair trade practice does this conduct most clearly constitute?

Why B is correct

Under O.C.G.A. § 33-6-4(b)(4), boycott, coercion, and intimidation encompass using threats or pressure to force a policyholder into a particular course of dealing. Threatening cancellation unless clients abandon their agents is coercion aimed at controlling how customers do business — it differs from defamation under O.C.G.A. § 33-6-4(b)(3), which is about false or malicious statements rather than threats.

Why the other options are wrong

• A) Defamation requires false or maliciously critical statements about a competitor; the insurer here made threats, not disparaging statements.
• C) Unfair discrimination concerns disparate treatment of applicants or insureds of the same class and hazard, not pressuring customers over their choice of agent.
• D) Misrepresentation involves false statements about policy terms or benefits to induce a transaction; a threat of cancellation is pressure, not a misstatement of coverage.

Memory hook

Threats coerce; lies defame — keep the two straight.