Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
recast their simple breach of contract claim into a tort claim to avoid the reality that the statute of limitations has run on their contract claim. But the allegations are for a simple breach of an oral contract — Figaro-la borrowed $25,000 from the Walkers which he promised to repay within three weeks, and the loan remains unpaid. The complaint thus alleges a failure to comply with the terms of the contract. The Walkers had four years to bring a breach of contract action against Figarola, but they failed to do so. They cannot now seek a remedy in tort for a debt which could have been discharged by the payment of money by simply alleging that Figarola never intended to keep his promise to repay the debt. See Hotels of Key Largo v. RHI Hotels, Inc., 694 So.2d 74, 78 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) .
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that misrepresentations relating to the breaching partys performance of a contract do not give rise to an independent cause of action in tort
B. holding that the failure to act in good faith  does not amount to an independent tort the breach of the implied duty under the ucc gives rise only to a cause of action for breach of contract
C. holding that negligent breach of a duty assumed in a contract does not give rise to a separate tort claim
D. holding that failure to record an assignment does not give rise to a cause of action
E. holding that the first amendment does not by itself give rise to a cause of action for damages
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.