With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". in good faith. FFG, a captive, entered into the Administration Agreement with Federal, to whom it delegated the primary control of the claims-handling process. This included the authority “to receive, review and evaluate any Claims” brought under the Policy, (Administration Agreement § 2(A)), and “to interpret [Policy] language, make [Policy] coverage decisions, and to settle covered Claims for any amount up to the [Policy] limits.” (Id. § 2(C).) In a sense, FFG “controlled” Federal’s authority by requiring express written authority before Federal could deny, negotiate, adjust, or settle a claim, (id. § 2(A)), but the “ultimate disposition” of claims was nevertheless Federal’s call to make. (Id. § 2(E)); see Dellaira v. Farmers Ins. Exch., 136 N.M. 552, 102 P.3d 111, 114-16 (App.2004) (<HOLDING>). FFG simply was responsible for maintaining

A: holding that the district court erred in dismissing the injured party from the insureds declaratory relief action based on a default judgment entered against the insured and the insureds tortfeasor son
B: holding that bad faith handling of an insureds claim fell within the act
C: holding that an administrator that has control over and makes the ultimate determination regarding the merits of an insureds claim must act in good faith in processing the insureds claims
D: holding that insurance company could sue in insureds name following assignment of insureds interest against tortfeasor
C.