- Sections
- P'ninat Mishpat
Based on partial ruling 80029 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Why Did they Stop Working?
Case: The plaintiffs (=pl) hired a contracting company (=def), who had worked for them in the past, to add on a floor to their home. Def was to work from May until September. The sides signed an itemized price-estimate sheet – the full job was to cost 540,737 NIS. Pl was to pay after certain stages were met, but pl gave the first 100,000 NIS before work started. After serious progress through June, def’s work became sporadic and stopped in Sept., after pl had paid 250,000 NIS, and with the work not close to finished. Def agreed to resume work only if pl gave serious new installments and demanded extra pay for alleged changes pl made to the plans (especially, deciding to suspend parts of the job). After pl refused to pay more before def progressed, def removed their equipment from the site, and pl began supervising the job with subcontractors. Pl has claims based on overpaying, the high price to finish the job, and damages incurred. Beit din proposed hiring an expert to appraise the value of the work done by def and of the work remaining to be done. Pl claimed that it was unnecessary because the price estimate shows the binding price of each part of the work. Def argued that the estimate cannot teach about the details, and that prices should be higher per item since pl decided to cut back on the work. This partial ruling is to decide responsibility for the stoppage of work, which determines who will pay for the expert and will impact other elements of the final ruling.
Ruling: Pl presented a coherent account of the facts and their thinking along the way. Def contradicted themselves and gave illogical answers to many basic questions. Among def’s difficult positions was that the price estimates were highly inaccurate, and, in any case, they never presented a coherent explanation as to how their work could have been worth more than the 250,000 NIS pl had already paid.
Also, before a contractor stops work for periods that will cause them to grossly miss critical deadlines in a manner that will damage their client, they must warn the client and work diligently on dispute resolution. For most of the summer, they did none of this, but just made excuses. Def claimed that they could not continue moving forward because of negative experience with pl’s payments on a previous job. However, they could not corroborate this, and this concern did not find expression in the agreed upon payment terms discussed before work began. Finally, pl presented a recording of a phone conversation in which def said he would proceed if he had money to do so, which he did not have. Pl castigated def for taking their money to use on other projects. Def is heard choking up in silence for a minute, and when pl said he was forced to replace def, def answered "100%."
Pl is correct that def took too much money and demanded even more in order to try to be solvent. This is a morally difficult but hard-to-avoid situation for one with a failing business and does not reflect def’s desire to cheat pl. However, pl was clearly right, and def is responsible for all of the direct and some indirect damage to pl. We will quantify this with the help of an expert def will pay for.
Ruling: Pl presented a coherent account of the facts and their thinking along the way. Def contradicted themselves and gave illogical answers to many basic questions. Among def’s difficult positions was that the price estimates were highly inaccurate, and, in any case, they never presented a coherent explanation as to how their work could have been worth more than the 250,000 NIS pl had already paid.
Also, before a contractor stops work for periods that will cause them to grossly miss critical deadlines in a manner that will damage their client, they must warn the client and work diligently on dispute resolution. For most of the summer, they did none of this, but just made excuses. Def claimed that they could not continue moving forward because of negative experience with pl’s payments on a previous job. However, they could not corroborate this, and this concern did not find expression in the agreed upon payment terms discussed before work began. Finally, pl presented a recording of a phone conversation in which def said he would proceed if he had money to do so, which he did not have. Pl castigated def for taking their money to use on other projects. Def is heard choking up in silence for a minute, and when pl said he was forced to replace def, def answered "100%."
Pl is correct that def took too much money and demanded even more in order to try to be solvent. This is a morally difficult but hard-to-avoid situation for one with a failing business and does not reflect def’s desire to cheat pl. However, pl was clearly right, and def is responsible for all of the direct and some indirect damage to pl. We will quantify this with the help of an expert def will pay for.

P'ninat Mishpat (688)
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit
717 - Was the Garden Included?
718 - Why Did they Stop Working?
719 - Car Accident – part I
Load More

Payments for Leaving Apartment in Disrepair
based on ruling 79025 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Tammuz 18 5781

Car Accident – part I
Based on ruling 82016 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Tevet 5783

Car Accident – part II
Based on ruling 82016 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Shvat 5783

Disqualifications of Witnesses
part I
Various Rabbis | Adar 5770

Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit

Halachic Shmita Guide from Eretz Hemdah
Elul 8 5781

Connecting Disciplines in Torah Study
Igrot Hare’aya – Letters of Rav Kook #103 – part II
Sivan 8 5782

A Commercial Rental for a Closed Business – part II
based on ruling 80047 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Shvat 1 5782

Interceding Regarding a Will
Igrot Hare’aya – Letters of Rav Kook #105
Sivan 28 5782

The Mitzvah of “Duchening” - Birchas Kohanim
Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff | 5769

When May I Ask a Non-Jew to Assist Me on Shabbos?
Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff | Adar 15 5780

This is the way we wash our hands
Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff | Tamuz 4 5775
Days on Which Tachanun Is Not Recited
Chapter Twenty One-Part Three
Rabbi Eliezer Melamed | 5775

Nasso: How the Rambam Views Nazirism
5 Sivan 5783

Hinting One Does Not Want an Aliya
Rabbi Daniel Mann | SIvan 5783

Raising and Waving – This is Needed for Educators
Rabbi Yossef Carmel | SIvan 5783
