Beit Midrash
- Sections
- Chemdat Yamim
- Bemare Habazak - Rabbis Questions
- Family and Society
- Financial Laws and Tzedaka
- Additional Lessons
Answer: Since you present this as a theoretical question (although it can happen) and, certainly it will not be adjudicated, we can discuss this and begin with the fundamental level.

Bemare Habazak - Rabbis Questions (626)
Rabbi Daniel Mann
373 - Toveling which Utensil First
374 - Accidentally Staying on the Bus Longer than Envisioned
375 - Engagement Parties during the Three Weeks
Load More
The second issue is that of damage. Consider the following true story I heard. Someone entered a taxi in Jerusalem, asked to go to Petach Tikvah, and fell asleep. He was woken in the city of Petach Tikvah and told the driver he meant Petach Tikvah Street (in Romema, Jerusalem). The passenger cannot argue that he only agreed to a short ride because he irresponsibly (by not saying "Street" and by falling asleep) made the driver waste work time and gas driving to a distant location. (Whether there should be any discount is beyond our scope, as is the question as to what factors (e.g., extenuating circumstances) determine when there is an obligation to pay in such a case of semi-direct "damage" – see P’sak Din 73082 of Eretz Hemdah-Gazit.) This element also does not apply here because the driver and the company presumably lose nothing by the passenger staying on somewhat longer.
Another reason to obligate someone is the benefit he received from the service, even if he never agreed to pay for it (see Rama, Choshen Mishpat 264:4). In this case, it would seem that you would not normally benefit from going farther when you wanted to go to somewhere else closer. Therefore, this would not be grounds for payment either. It would be different if when you woke up after missing your stop and realized that getting off a few stops later would be better than getting off at the very next stop. Then, the additional stop(s) would be considered benefit, under the circumstances that developed, and there would be reason to pay.
Practically, one would have to consider other factors. It is very possible that staying on longer than you told the driver could be a problem of chillul Hashem or "Vehiyitem nekiyim" (not causing people to suspect you of sin – see an example in Rambam, Shekalim 2:10). This can happen either if an inspector comes on or if the driver happens to remember where you said you were getting off and where you actually did. It is also possible that the bus company has a set, perhaps even written, policy for cases of staying on accidentally longer than expected. While it sounds random, it makes sense for the company to have a policy so that people not be able to lie and claim that it was accidental. Anyone who gets on a bus accepts the legal policies of the bus company. This is different from a simple agreement between two people, where neither has an advantage over the other. A company prepares a service with rules (sometimes approved by a government agency); the passenger decides to use the bus – on their terms. On the other hand, the driver might inform you that he believes you and it is not necessary to pay. He probably has authority to forgive (mechila) a small payment of this sort.
In summary, on fundamental grounds, you would not be obligated to pay based on any of the constructs for payment for services. Any obligation would be based on more technical grounds.

Ask the Rabbi: Owning Guns
Rabbi Daniel Mann | Adar 5785

Ask the Rabbi: Purim Meshulash
Rabbi Daniel Mann | Adar 5785

Ask the Rabbi: Finishing to Eat but Continuing to Drink
Rabbi Daniel Mann | Iyar 5785

Ask the Rabbi: Rubbing Cream on Someone who Accepted Shabbat
Rabbi Daniel Mann | Cheshvan 5786

Rabbi Daniel Mann

Tazria Metzora Question
5772

Calling a Kohen Who is a Katan
Av 22 5777

Encouraging a Child to Criticize His Parent
5774


























