Negligent misstatement

Hi sir, I have a doubt regarding the following question.

In Hedley Byrne v Heller & Partners, the House of Lords held that a banker would owe a duty of care on a reference for a client given voluntarily without consideration to a third party. What was the basis of this decision?
A) That in such a case a duty is owed to persons generally.
B) That a duty is owed to those persons who could reasonably be foreseen as relying on the statement.
C)That a duty is owed to a person the defendant knew or ought to have known would rely on the statement.
D)That a duty is only owed to t hose with whom the defendant was in a fiduciary or contractual relationship.

The answer given in the book is C. My doubt is why is the answer not B?

Thank you!