Which choice describes the election of rights?

The correct choice highlights the concept of waiving a right, which means voluntarily giving up a legal claim or defense. In the context of the election of rights, an individual or party may decide not to contest allegations against them, effectively choosing to forgo the opportunity to dispute those claims. By doing so, they are opting to accept the situation as presented, which can have particular implications in a legal or regulatory context.

This choice reflects a strategic decision where one may opt for a more passive approach instead of actively engaging in a dispute process. Waiving rights could lead to different outcomes, depending on the circumstances and the nature of the alleged claims. It's essential to understand that this option can have significant consequences, as it may result in accepting penalties or outcomes without further contestation.

The other options do not align with the concept of election of rights in the same manner. Disputing allegations or requiring a formal hearing does not reflect an acceptance or waiver of rights, but rather a proactive stance in addressing the claims made. Therefore, the focus on waiving a right clearly captures the essence of the election of rights as a decision-making process in response to allegations.