Which statement about duties of insurance producers is accurate?

• A. They owe only to the insurer.
• B. They owe no duties to insureds.
• C. They owe duties at three levels: generalist, dual-agency, or expert level.
• D. They owe only a generalist level of duties.

Answer: (C)

The main idea is that insurance producers have duties to the insureds that vary with the nature of the relationship, not just a single, flat standard. The statement that producers owe duties at three levels—generalist, dual-agency, or expert level—best reflects how these duties can scale depending on how the producer interacts with clients and insurers.

At the generalist level, there are basic duties common to every transaction: honest disclosure of relevant information, fair dealing, compliance with applicable laws and contract terms, and avoidance of misrepresentation. These are the baseline standards expected of any producer.

When a producer represents both the insurer and the insured (dual-agency), duties become more demanding. There is a heightened obligation to avoid conflicts of interest, to disclose the dual representation, to obtain informed consent, and to treat both parties fairly. The producer should provide suitable information and options to the insured and not prioritize the insurer over the client.

In the expert level, the duty rises to a higher standard of care, typically when the producer provides specialized or professional-level advice. This includes a thorough assessment of the insured’s needs, careful analysis of product features, ongoing service and updates as circumstances change, thorough documentation, and advice delivered with a fiduciary-like duty of loyalty and care.

The other choices don’t fit because they imply no duties to insureds, or duties only to the insurer, or duties limited to a single generalist level, which ignores the more nuanced, tiered duties that can arise in real-world agency relationships.