What would a lawyer call this?
February 8, 2013 5:33 AM Subscribe
Is there a legal principal here, and if so, what is it called? YANML. Question about paying for a service that is impossible to benefit from. Explanation and example inside….
posted by otto42 to Work & Money (23 answers total)
I am less concerned about the possibility of winning or losing an argument at some point and more interested in whether a specific legal principal or phrase describes the following example.
A person is fired from a job on June 1, XX. That person is no longer covered by the employer’s health plan. The person and the employer spend June and July (60 days) negotiating a severance package. On August 1, the fired person negotiates a severance package whereby the employer will pay 75% of the premiums for six months.
Let’s say that the settlement contract does not give specific dates as to what six month period would be covered.
The employer tells the fired employee that the premiums they paid the insurance company cover the period from June 1 to December 1 (six months.)
The fired person’s problem:
Premiums were paid for June and July on August 1. Therefore, the fired person can not benefit from the coverage because they can not go back in time.
So my question remains, is there a legal term or principal or phrase that describes not being able to exercise a right because a person could not know they had the right? (Put another way, the person’s coverage for the first two months has no value because June and July have already passed.)