Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
purpose of receiving claims from an employee covered by a group insurance policy. Our research has not disclosed any Montana case that resolves this question. Perhaps the closest case is Nautilus Ins. Co. v. First Nat’l Ins. Inc., 254 Mont. 296, 837 P.2d 409 (1992), in which your Court stated that an “insurance broker is usually regarded as the agent of the insured” and that “the determination of which party a broker is acting for as to a particular matter depends on which party requested him to do the particular thing.” Id. at 411-12. There is case law from some jurisdictions which supports the position that an employer acts as an agent for an insurance company that has issued a group policy covering employees. See Norby v. Bankers Life Co., 304 Minn. 464, 231 N.W.2d 665, 669 (1975) ; Bass v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co., 10
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding an employee is an agent of his employer where the employer assumes the right to control time manner and method of work
B. holding that the employer may be considered the insurers agent where the employer with the consent of the insurer performs routine administrative functions such as assisting in the processing of claims
C. holding that the employer was not the insurers agent
D. holding that glc 152 15 provides that the only party immune from suit under the statute is the direct employer a special employer is not immune because the special employer is not liable for the payment of workers compensation and there was no agreement between the direct employer and the special employer that the special employer would be liable for the payment of such compensation
E. holding that an employer who performs administrative functions under a group insurance policy as in the instant case is deemed to be the agent of the insurer citing elfstrom
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.