Shabbat Parashat Eikev| 5763
Ona’ah (Mispricing) - IV -Informing the Other Side of Mispricing
There is a broad machloket between R. Yehuda and R. Meir, whether two sides to monetary affairs can agree to relinquish protections that the Torah provided one or both of them. The specific case they discuss is that of a woman who marries with the condition that her husband will not need to support her. A similar machloket arises when one sells his friend an object on condition that the laws of ona’ah should not apply to the transaction. Rav claims that this case is worse than the aforementioned machloket, because the buyer is not aware that he is, in fact, being overcharged (Bava Metzia 51a-b). To make a long story short, we pasken like Rav (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 227:21) that ona’ah does apply.
However, the gemara and Shulchan Aruch (ibid.) make a distinction. If the seller is straightforward and states specifically by how much he is mispricing, then the rule of ona’ah does not apply. The mepharshim argue whether it is sufficient to inform him that there is mispricing or whether one has to say exactly how much it was mispriced (see S’ma 227:39). Although one can argue the following point, it appears from the Shulchan Aruch Harav (Dinei Ona’ah 4) that it is even permitted to misprice under these circumstances.
Top of page
Print this page
Send to friend
This edition of Hemdat Yamim is