Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
guest was precluded when insured’s promise to maintain insurance on home insured was not currently occupying showed insured’s intent that insurance was to benefit guest living in home), citing Alaska Ins. Co. v. RCA Alaska Commun., 623 P.2d 1216 (Alaska 1981) (commercial tenant was implied coinsured for limited purpose of defeating insurer’s subrogation claim when lease provision required landlord to obtain and keep in effect insurance on premises). Although an insurance company has the right to recover against a wrongdoer whose conduct has subjected the insurance company to liability, no right of subrogation can arise in favor of an insurer against its own insured. Jindra v. Clayton, 247 Neb. 597, 529 N.W.2d 523 (1995). See, also, Fellmer v. Gruber, 261 N.W.2d 173 (Iowa 1978) ; Housing Inv. Corp. v. Carris, 389 So. 2d 689
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that contractual privity between the buyer and seller was not necessary for a cfa claim
B. holding that seller carried insurance for benefit of buyer and held proceeds in trust for buyer when seller agreed to maintain insurance until possession date but bam burned before buyer took possession
C. holding that breach occurred when seller told buyer that seller would do no more to rectify alleged warranty violation
D. holding that a seller could enforce an arbitration provision against a buyer even though only the buyer had signed the provision
E. holding that broker who represents seller cannot represent buyer in purchase of property from seller without sellers knowledge and consent
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.