Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
on an oral loan payable upon demand begins to run only after there has been a breach by the debtor, i.e., the debt- or has refused to repay the loan at the time the creditor demands repayment. As noted by the Second District, this is the rule that obtains when there is a written loan agreement providing that the loan is payable upon demand, and we see no valid basis for distinguishing between the two situations. The critical feature of both forms of loans, whether oral or written, is the provision for repayment upon demand. When that provision is the same in both instances, we see no reason to have one rule that says a demand must first be made and rejected in the one instance, but not in the other. Cf. Schreiber v. Hackett, 173 Ill.App.3d 129, 122 Ill.Dec. 914, 527 N.E.2d 412 (1988) . The cases which adhere to a contrary rule
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. 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
B. holding that consideration for guaranty of loan previously made was that guarantors friend the bank manager who issued the loan would not lose his job for making a bad loan
C. holding that the statute does not begin to run until at least a demand has been made upon the government but determining that the facts of that case made it unnecessary to choose between the date of demand and the date of actual payment as the triggering date for the running of the statute of limitations
D. 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
E. 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
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.