Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
repayment or it was convenient for him or her to do so, and the statute of limitations would begin to run at that time. Despite the evidentiary problems inherent in proving the state of the debtor's finances at various times before an action is initiated, some courts have found that this view is better aligned with the parties' intent and the general rules of contract law. See Annotation, 14 A.L.R. 4th at 1385; see also Rees v. Heyser, 404 N.E.2d 1183 (Ind.Ct.App.1980) (where individual sought repayment of oral loan which did not contain a definite time of repayment, the court held that the statute of limitations did not begin to run on the promise until a reasonable time for performance had elapsed); Phillips & Jordan Invest. Corp. v. Ashblue Co., 86 N.C.App. 186, 357 S.E.2d 1 (1987) . Because this intermediate approach emphasizes
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a notice of claim period did not begin to run until discovery of the injury
B. holding that the statute of limitations for an attorney malpractice suit did not begin to run until the client had suffered some actual damage
C. holding in an action on a verbal agreement which failed to specify time for repayment that the statute of limitations did not begin to run until reasonable time for repayment had passed
D. holding that where parties to an oral loan agreed that the loan would be repaid on demand the statute of limitations did not begin to run until the date plaintiff demanded repayment of the loan
E. holding that where oral loan was silent as to the time of repayment the statute of limitations began to run at the time the contract was made
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.