Ari came to day camp with his new bike, which cost $300.
“That’s a nice bike!” Dov complimented him. “Could I borrow it for an hour to ride around the camp?”
“I’d rather not lend it out,” replied Ari. “I just bought it, and it’s still gleaming. I’m afraid that if I lend it to someone, he might fall or bang into something, and the bike will get scratched.”
Dov thought for a minute. “I’m willing to rent it for $40 for the hour,” he said. “I’ll pay you tomorrow.”
“If you’re willing to rent it, then OK,” Ari said.
Ari took the bike and rode around; he returned an hour later. “Your bike really rides nicely!” he exclaimed.
The next day, Ari asked Dov for the $40.
“This morning, I asked some friends how much the rental was worth,” replied Dov. “They told me that bike rentals are usually about $20 an hour, and no more than $30 an hour. I’m willing to pay you $30, but no more.”
“But we agreed on $40,” said Ari. “I don’t care what rentals usually are.”
“But $40 an hour is an unfair price!” argued Dov. “That’s called ona’ah, aggrievement, and not allowed! I didn’t know yesterday how much a bike rental should be.”
“I know that there is ona’ah regarding sales,” replied Ari, “but I never heard about ona’ah regarding rental. Anyway, I didn’t overcharge you; you offered $40 on your own! Besides, you should have asked around yesterday. You can’t come today and claim ona’ah.”
“What’s the difference?” argued Dov. “Sale or rental, the price was unfair!”
“Rabbi Dayan is giving a shiur today,” said Ari. “We can ask him!”
After the shiur, the two approached Rabbi Dayan and asked, “is Dov required to pay the full $40?”
“The Gemara (B.M. 56b) teaches that the halachos of ona’ah – unfair pricing – apply also to rental,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “Regarding this, we consider rental as a ‘sale for the day’ (C.M. 227:35).
“Similar to ona’ah of a sale, we differentiate in rental ona’ah between [overpaying] less than a sixth and a sixth or more, and between real estate (which is generally excluded from ona’ah) and movable items.
“However, unlike a sale, where the buyer must claim ona’ah shortly after the sale, once he is able to check the price, a rental ona’ah claim can be made even if discovered later, since the rental item is no longer in his hands to check the fair rental price (Sma 227:65).
“Another possible difference is regarding personal items. When a person sells his personal items at more than their market value, the buyer cannot claim ona’ah, since a person is not always willing to sell his personal items at their value (C.M. 227:23-24).
“The poskim do not explicitly discuss whether rental of personal items is also excluded from ona’ah; presumably, the halacha is parallel. However, the aforementioned logic seemingly does not apply, since the owner does not part with his item in a rental, so the halacha may be different, and ona’ah may apply. Furthermore, even regarding sale of personal items, there is a dispute whether there is ona’ah when more than a sixth.
“Although the aggrieved party, in this case Dov, offered the unfair price of his own accord, out of ignorance, and was not misled by Ari, Dov can claim ona’ah. Moreover, since ona’ah is considered a form of theft, the owner is obligated to alert the buyer or renter that he is overpaying (Pis’chei Choshen, Ona’ah 10:1[1]).
“Thus,” concluded Rabbi Dayan, “since the price was at least 25% more than it should be, and Dov hasn’t paid yet, he does not have to pay the unfair price of $40.”
Verdict: The laws of ona’ah apply also to rental of movable items, with some differences. It is questionable whether it applies to rental of personal items. Even if the buyer or renter offers an unfair price of his own accord out of ignorance, the owner has to clarify that this price is significantly more than typical.
To receive BHI’s free newsletter, Business Weekly, send an e-mail to [email protected].
This article is intended for learning purposes and cannot be used for final halachic decision. There are also issues of dina d’malchusa to consider in actual cases.
