web analytics
March 5, 2015 / 14 Adar , 5775
At a Glance
Judaism
Sponsored Post


Verbal Stipulation

Business-Halacha-logo

Chaim had an old car that he would regularly rent to the fellows of his kollel for a nominal fee. Moshe asked if he could use the car for the afternoon to do a couple of shopping errands. “With pleasure,” Chaim said. “However, before you take the car, I’d like you to read this statement of terms.” He asked Moshe to read the agreement:

  1. The user of the car shall pay $0.30 per mile.
  2. The user of the car is fully liable for it, even for uncontrollable circumstances (oness) and even for damage due to malfunctioning (meisah machamas melacha).

“Wow, that’s quite stiff!” exclaimed Moshe. “Usually, a person who rents something is liable only for loss and theft, but not beyond that.”

“I know, but I don’t want a headache afterward,” said Chaim. “This way, I know that I’m legally covered if anything happens.”

Moshe took the keys from Chaim. “Thanks a lot,” he said. “I expect to be back within two hours.” Moshe got into the car and drove off.

After about half an hour, the car suddenly stalled. Moshe tried, unsuccessfully, to restart it. He put the car in neutral, and with the help of some friends was able to push the car to a mechanic up the block.

The mechanic examined the car. “The transmission went,” he said. “Nothing your fault; it’s an old car. But you’re going to have to fix the transmission.”

“How much does it cost?” asked Moshe.

“It will run about $2,500,” said the mechanic. “No way around it, though.”

Moshe called Chaim. “You’ll never believe what happened!” he exclaimed.

“What?” asked Chaim, in a concerned tone.

“The car suddenly stopped,” Moshe said. “I managed to get it to a mechanic, who said the transmission went.”

“I’ll have the car towed to my own mechanic and have him check the car and do the job,” said Chaim. “You’re responsible for the repair, though. Remember, the agreement included even liability for malfunctioning.”

Moshe thought of his nearly empty bank account, and the various loans he had taken over the past year. “I never expected that this would really happen,” he said to Chaim. “Anyway, the mechanic was clear that it’s not my fault. It’s not really fair that I should have to pay for your old car’s malfunctions. The car is barely worth that much!”

Later that day Chaim related the story to his study partner. “I feel bad that Moshe should have to pay,” Chaim said, “but he read the terms and agreed to them.”

“I’m not sure your agreement is legally binding,” said his partner. “This is classic meisa machmas melacha, for which even a borrower is not liable. (C.M. 340:1) To accept an additional obligation usually needs a signed contract, a kinyan (act of transaction), or a handshake.”

“It seems to me that an agreement is an agreement,” said Chaim, “but I’ll check with Rabbi Dayan.”

Chaim called Rabbi Dayan and presented the issue. “Is reading the terms legally binding,” he asked, “even if not accompanied with any kinyan?”

“A renter who agreed to be responsible for uncontrollable circumstances (oness) is liable, even without a signed contract or kinyan,” answered Rabbi Dayan. “It is questionable, though, whether this is true for meisa machamas melacha.”

“What is this based on?” asked Chaim.

“The Gemara [B.M. 94a] teaches that a guardian (shomer), who is generally exempt from uncontrollable circumstances [ones], can stipulate and accept responsibility as a borrower [sho’el], who is liable even for oness,” explained Rabbi Dayan. “R. Yochanan maintains that he does not even need a kinyan; the fact that this boosts his reputation as a reliable person is sufficient for him to commit himself.” (C.M. 291:27; 305:4)

“And what about meisa machmas melacha?” asked Chaim. “Why is that a question?”

“The Ketzos Hachoshen [340:1] questions whether a borrower who accepts liability for meisa machamas melacha suffices with verbal stipulation alone,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “He links it to two explanations in the Tosfos, and cites an additional dispute between other Rishonim on the topic.”

“However, the Nesivos [340:2] rules that a verbal commitment suffices,” continued Rabbi Dayan. “He explains that, on account of the stipulation, the renter is like any other person who used the item without permission and is liable for damage. Aruch Hashulchan [C.M. 340:7; 291:57] also rules this way, provided that the stipulation is made when receiving the item; he enters the shemira with a greater responsibility.” (See Pischei Choshen, Pikadon 10:7[14])

“Where does this leave me?” asked Chaim.

“Since there is a dispute in the case of meisa machamas melacha, it is not possible to legally obligate the renter,” said Rabbi Dayan. “You should seek a compromise leaning in favor of the owner, as the Nesivos and Aruch Hashulchan rule that way.”

About the Author: Rabbi Meir Orlian is a faculty member of the Business Halacha Institute, headed by HaRav Chaim Kohn, a noted dayan. To receive BHI’s free newsletter, Business Weekly, send an e-mail to subscribe@businesshalacha.com. For questions regarding business halacha issues, or to bring a BHI lecturer to your business or shul, call the confidential hotline at 877-845-8455 or e-mail ask@businesshalacha.com.


If you don't see your comment after publishing it, refresh the page.

Our comments section is intended for meaningful responses and debates in a civilized manner. We ask that you respect the fact that we are a religious Jewish website and avoid inappropriate language at all cost.

If you promote any foreign religions, gods or messiahs, lies about Israel, anti-Semitism, or advocate violence (except against terrorists), your permission to comment may be revoked.

No Responses to “Verbal Stipulation”

Comments are closed.

Current Top Story
US Secretary of State John Kerry with German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier before P5+1 talks. (Nov. 22, 2014.)
Fears Over US Iran Deal Trigger Mideast Nuclear Race, Saudi-South Korea Deal
Latest Judaism Stories
Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis

To the glee of all Israel haters it was Netanyahu who was accused of endangering US-Israel relations

Ki Tisa_lecture

Over and over, the text tells us about “keeping” Shabbat, about holiness, and a covenant – but why?

Aaron and  The Golden Calf by James Tissot

Aharon’s guilt with the golden calf is not clear-cut. What if Moshe were in his brother’s place?

Rabbi Sacks

The Sabbath is a full dress rehearsal for an ideal society that has not yet come to pass-but will

When Hashem told Moshe of the option to destroy the people and make him and his descendants into a great nation, Hashem was telling Moshe that it is up to him.

Just like Moses and Aaron, Mordechai decides to ruin the party…

An Auto Accident
‘All Agree That They Are Exempt’
(Kesubbos 35a)

Question: If Abraham was commanded to circumcise his descendants on the eighth day, why do Arabs – who claim to descend from Abraham through Yishmael – wait until their children are 13 to circumcise them? I am aware that this is a matter of little consequence to our people. Nevertheless, this inconsistency is one that piques my curiosity.

M. Goldman
(Via E-mail)

Why would the exemption of women from donating the half shekel exempt them from davening Musaf?

This concept should be very relevant to us as we, too, should be happy beyond description.

The Holocaust was the latest attempt of Amalek to destroy the special bond that we enjoy with God.

One can drink up to the Talmud’s criterion to confuse Mordechai and Haman-but not beyond.

“The voice is the voice of Yaakov, but the hands are the hands of Esav” gives great insight to Purim

Purim is the battleground of extremes, Amalek and Yisrael, with Zoroastrian Persia in between.

One should not give the money before Purim morning or after sunset.

More Articles from Rabbi Meir Orlian
Business-Halacha-logo

“We really appreciate your efforts in straightening the shul,” said Mr. Reiss. “How is it going?”

Business-Halacha-logo

“Halacha differentiates between giving a gift, forgoing a debt [mechila], and granting permission to take something,” answered Rabbi Dayan.

“I don’t accept this,” said Mr. Zummer. “I want you to finish! You’re not allowed to just stop in the middle!”

“That’s what you’re wondering?” laughed Mr. Rubin. “That ring is not mine at all. A relative gave me money to buy it for him.”

“How could you have expected my glasses to be there?” argued Mr. Weiss. “You shouldn’t have to pay.”

“It means that the disqualification of relatives as witnesses is a procedural issue, not a question of honesty,” explained Rabbi Dayan.

“The issue is not just logistical,” replied Mr. Kahn. “I thought that halacha requires that the beginning of the adjudication and acceptance of testimony be during daytime.” (C.M. 5:2; 28:24)

A few days, Mrs. Feldman called back. “I would prefer a nice cake rather than the chocolate.”

Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/halacha-hashkafa/verbal-stipulation/2013/10/04/

Scan this QR code to visit this page online: