With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". In count IV, Del Monte brings a claim for deceptive and unfair trade practices under Florida Statutes §§ 501.204 et seq. Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act (“FDUTPA”) pro vides, “Unfair methods of competition, unconscionable acts or practices, and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the conduct of any trade or commerce are hereby declared unlawful.” Fla. Stat. § 501.204(1). A plaintiff seeking to recover under this statute has two potential remedies available. If the plaintiff is an individual consumer, he or she can assert a claim for damages. See Fla. Stat. § 501.211(2). If the plaintiff is a competitor of the defendant, it may seek declaratory relief. See Fla. Stat. § 501.211(1); see also Big Tomato v. Tasty Concepts, Inc., 972 F.Supp. 662, 663-64 (S.D.Fla.1997) (<HOLDING>). There is no question that, as a consumer, Del

A: holding that claims alleging negligent misrepresentation and failure to disclose seek economic damages not property damages within insureds policy
B: holding that competitor could seek only injunction under fdutpa not damages
C: holding that because punitive damages are nonpecuniary a plaintiff has standing to seek them under the general maritime law only if having standing to seek other nonpecuniary losses
D: recognizing that fdutpa cases apply a benefit of the bargain damages formula
B.