Dov was looking to rent a room in the city. He heard that his friend Yosef had signed a lease for an apartment and was looking for a roommate, so he approached him and asked if he could live with him for a while.
“I expect to be relocated by my company sometime during the year. I don’t know exactly when, so I would only accept responsibility to pay until I leave, which may be in the middle of the month,” Dov said.
“I don’t have anybody else at the moment,” said Yosef. “I’m happy to have you for as long as you’re here.”
A few months later, Dov learned that he would be relocated on October 24 and informed Yosef. Yosef posted advertisements for the room, and found a replacement roommate, who would be able to come the beginning of November.
“Would you be willing to cover the final week in October despite our initial agreement?” Yosef asked Dov.
“Okay,” Dov agreed without giving the matter much thought.
When October came, Dov realized that the extra week amounted to a few hundred dollars and shared his hesitancy to pay this amount with Yosef.
“But you already agreed to cover that week,” Yosef replied.
The two roommates approached Rabbi Dayan to find out if Dov had to pay for the final week of October. Rabbi Dayan replied as follows: “Terms agreed upon before the beginning of a rental are binding even without a kinyan since the rental usage itself serves as a kinyan for the agreed-upon terms. Therefore, had the initial agreement been that you would cover the rent until the end of the month or until the replacement tenant entered, it would certainly be binding. [Choshen Mishpat 315:2, 4; Sma 315:3]
“The nature of your agreement to cover the extra week in this case is unclear. Perhaps it was an agreement to extend the rental a week. The Machaneh Ephraim [Hilchos Sechirus #13] discusses a verbal arrangement to extend a rental. He concludes, against the Rivash, that the continued usage of the house during the initial period – locking and unlocking – can serve as a kinyan for the extension of the rental.
“One could also argue, though, that there was no intent to extend the rental in this case since you weren’t going to be present. All that you agreed to do was to pay for the week, which is essentially a gift to Yosef. A verbal commitment to give a gift is not legally binding. Nonetheless, it is meritorious to uphold one’s word.
“Moreover, it is considered improper to retract if the recipient truly expected to receive the gift. The nature of his expectation depends on the amount of the gift, the financial status of the giver, and the language used. [Choshen Mishpat 204:8; 241:1; Pischei Choshen, Kinyanim 15:4(5); B’tzel Hachochma 5:158]
“In light of the second possibility, Dov cannot be made to pay for the extra week,” concluded Rabbi Dayan, “but it is proper for him to pay nonetheless.”