In what circumstance during a pretext interview may the questions be considered permissible?

The scenario described in choice B is permissible during a pretext interview because it involves the investigation of potential fraud. In situations where fraud is suspected, it is essential for insurers to gather accurate information in order to protect themselves and other policyholders. If an investigator uses a pretext—meaning they may not disclose their true identity or intentions—this can be justified as a means to uncover the truth about a situation that might involve dishonesty or misrepresentation on the part of the insured. This approach is often necessary to ensure that the insurer can make informed decisions about policy underwriting and claims.

In contrast, other scenarios may not meet the legal and ethical standards for conducting interviews. For example, questioning an insured before an application (choice A) typically falls outside the bounds of a permissible pretext interview, as the insurance process has not yet formally begun. Similarly, while asking questions to help underwriting decide on coverage (choice C) can be part of the standard application process, it does not involve the tactics or justifications that apply in a pretext situation. Lastly, refusing to identify oneself before a policy is underwritten (choice D) goes against standard practices of transparency and could undermine the ethical obligations of insurers.