DailyHalacha.com for Mobile Devices Now Available

Click Here to Sponsor Daily Halacha
"Delivered to Over 6000 Registered Recipients Each Day"

      
(File size: 662 KB)
May a Lender Charge a Penalty for a Delayed Payment of the Debt?

The Torah prohibition of Ri'bitt (interest) forbids accepting or giving compensation for the time in which a person retained somebody else's money. The question arises as to whether this prohibition would apply to an interest-free loan given on condition that the borrower must pay a fee – in addition to the amount borrowed – if he pays after the stipulated date. Since the agreement entails additional payment for the extra time in which the borrower retained the lender's money, perhaps this, too, should constitute a violation of Ri'bitt.

Rabbi Moshe Halevi (Israel, 1961-2001), in his work Milveh Hashem (p. 94), wants to rule that such an arrangement does not violate the Torah prohibition of Ri'bitt. On the surface, the extra payment rendered in a case of delayed payment is looked upon by Halacha as a penalty, imposed upon the borrower as an incentive for him to repay on time, rather than as interest on the loan. Indeed, even if the borrower pays the debt a moment after the deadline has passed, he must pay the late-fee, and thus the fee semmingly is not rendered in exchange for the time in which the borrower's money was retained. It rather serves as an incentive for the borrower to pay the debt by the designated deadline.

Nevertheless, Rav Moshe Halevi Z"L writes, although no Torah violation is involved under such an arrangement, the Sages forbade imposing this kind of penalty, as it gives the appearance of Ri'bitt. Furthermore, people might abuse this technique as a means of circumventing the Ri'bitt prohibition. For these reasons, the Sages enacted a law forbidding charging late-fees on interest-free loans.

Similarly, as the Shulhan Aruch establishes in Yoreh Dei'a (177:17), a borrower may not give the lender as collateral an item valued higher than the loan and stipulate that the lender can keep the collateral if the loan is not paid by the designated date. This arrangement, too, could be misused as a technique to avoid the Ri'bitt prohibition, as lenders will simply take costly possessions of borrowers and keep them if the money is not repaid on time. Although no Torah violation is entailed under such an arrangement, the Sages nevertheless forbade this agreement out of concern that it may lead to widespread violation of the Ri'bitt prohibition.

Summary: It is forbidden – by force of Rabbinic enactment – for a person to give an interest-free loan on condition that the borrower will pay an additional fee if he repays the debt after the designated deadline. Similarly, the borrower may not give the lender collateral valued higher than the loan and stipulate that the lender can keep the collateral if the debt is not paid on time.

 


Recent Daily Halachot...
Making a Zimun When a Third Person Joins After the First Two Finished Eating
Can People Form a Zimun if One Person’s Food is Forbidden for the Others?
When is Birkat Ha’mazon a Torah Obligation?
Can People Sitting at Separate Tables Join Together for a Zimun?
Birkat HaMazon If One Ate a Ke’zayit of Bread Slowly, Over the Course of an Extended Period
Kavana During Birkat Ha’mazon
Must the One Who Leads Birkat Ha’mazon Hold the Cup Throughout the Sheba Berachot?
“She’hakol” and “Boreh Nefashot” if One is Drinking Intermittently in One Location
Using for Kiddush or Birkat Ha’mazon a Cup of Wine From Which One Had Drunk
If the Group or Part of the Group Recited Birkat Ha’mazon Without a Zimun
If Three People Ate Together and One Needs to Leave Early
Should Abridged Texts of Birkat Ha’mazon be Printed in Siddurim?
Making a Zimun When a Third Person Joined After the First Two Finished Eating
The Importance of Using a Cup of Wine for Birkat Ha’mazon; Adding Three Drops of Water to the Cup
If One Ate Half a “Ke’zayit” of Fruit Requiring “Al Ha’etz,” and Half a “Ke’zayit” of Other Fruit
Page of 239
3585 Halachot found