Thank you for your patience.
The contract requires repayment if the employee fails to "remain employed for two years." However, the contract is ambiguous as to when that two year period begins running. On one hand, the agreement provides that "The start date for that repayment clock begins . . . .From the date of registration for the Becker CPA review program, if the recipient was already an active employee." (I take it that your husband was already an employee at the time he enrolled as you state that he enrolled " through one of the Big 5 accounting firms he worked for.") Note that this clause does is not limited to "terminations," so it arguably applies to both terminations and voluntary quits.
Since your husband enrolled more than two years ago, the above clause would seem to indicate that the two year period in which any reimbursement obligation could be triggered has expired and, thus, there is no repayment obligation at all.
However, there is another arguably contradictory clause below: "If the Employee voluntarily terminates employment . . .prior to two (2) years from the date of reimbursement
, Employee will repay for any and all reimbursements" according to the schedule you provided.
This clause SPECIFICALLY references "voluntary termination
," and it appears to define the "two year period" differently as beginning to run on the date of "reimbursement" for the program rather than from the date of "registration," as the previous clause does. This is a significant difference because it seems your husband ENROLLED more than two years before he quit but that he did not get reimbursed for the program until later. He was reimbursed within two yeas of quitting, and so would be liable to repay under THIS clause pursuant to the repayment schedule you quoted."
It is difficult to predict with any certainty how this discrepancy would be resolved. However, courts generally try to resolve ambiguities in contracts in ways that do not create inherent contradictions within the contracts. Thus, since the first clause does not specify whether it applies to terminations or resignations and the second clause specifically indicates that it applies to resignations, a court would probably be more likely to interpret the first clause as applying to terminations and the second to resignations. This way, the clauses are harmonious and not contradictory to one and other. According to this interpretation, an individual in your husband's circumstance would be required to pay back what he received pursuant to the repayment schedule quoted, using the date he RECEIVED his reimbursement for the program as the start date for the two year period.
I hope that you find this information helpful. Please do not hesitate
to let me know if you have any questions or concerns regarding the above and I will be more than happy to assist you further.
If you do not require any further assistance, please be so kind as to provide a positive rating of my service so that I may receive credit for assisting you. Very best wishes moving forward.