A Hypothetical Situation:
An individual lives in an assisted living / nursing facility and dies on January 4. The monthly fee has already been paid, as it is due by that day. The individual's family wishes to get a refund, pro-rated, for the remaining three weeks of January.
The individual's family signed a contract at the beginning of the individual's stay there that is called "Refund Policy" and states that no refund will be given unless 30 days notice is given to the facility when that individual is "leaving." Other words used in the same sentence included
The facility also now has a separate form that speaks specifically to what would happen in the event of the death of an individual staying in the facility. This form is called "No Refund Policy in Case of Death." It states there is no refund in the event of death, no matter what day of the month / no matter how much is paid for but will obviously not be used by that individual due to that individual's death. This form was never signed nor was the information it contains ever discussed with the individual or family.
Question:
Can the family get a pro-rated amount of money back for the time that the individual did not stay in the facility?
Note: I understand that in contract situations, the contract governs. That said, is there a way to use the second form and its specific mention of "death" to show that the first form did not sufficiently explain its terms and/or was ambiguous at the time it was signed?
If not, it sounds like "one party relied on a statement of the other about a material fact that the second party knew or should have known was mistaken by the first party."
And the existence of the second form would show that the second party knew or should have known that a form simply referencing "leaving" was insufficient for these purposes.
Thoughts?