Yeshuas Hashem K'Heref Ayin - Only G-d Can Fight City Hall

 

When HKBH performs personal miracles, it is a mitzvah to publicize them. This is especially after a difficult ordeal and after much supplication – tefillos, Tehillim, segulos, Kosel, Kivrei Tzadikim, tzedakah, brachos from live Tzadikim, you name it. My miracle happened, so I have come to publicize it. 

I don’t want to overdramatize. Baruch Hashem, it was not a health issue. There was never any threat of to life or limb. Nor was it a social issue like machlokes or shalom bayis, Ch”V. It was purely financial. But money makes the world go round and a neis is a neis. It still needs to be talked about, especially when one is trying to pick my pockets for money that isn’t there and isn’t letting go.

The difficult part lasted 3 ½ months. Then came the miracle. I will never know what remedial action(s) tipped the scale but, when it happened, it happened faster than I could have hoped. When we say “Yeshuos Hashem K’Heref Ayin” (the salvation of G-d can take place in the blink of an eye), it is no exaggeration.

The only thing is that, as of this writing, the ordeal has not been fully resolved. It is like when Haman was suddenly hanged at the darkest hour. It was our first geulah, but this did not yet totally nullify the harsh decree and resolve our problem. Likewise, I got the “demise” of Haman which, [co]incidentally, may have occurred on his actual yahrtzeit, but I still need to nullify the main problem. I hope this happens just as fast.

The Back Story

The story is that I am having an ongoing feud with the Jerusalem municipality, the Iriya, regarding property tax payments, arnona. I am blessed with a large family, and accordingly, I managed to acquire a larger than average apartment. I have been financially strapped for quite some time, partly due to being unemployed (that’ll do it for anyone), and amplified by having to maintain a large family and a larger than average apartment.

The Iriya has a system to give discounts on arnona for financially strapped residents, to which I have duly qualified over the past ten years. These discounts, by default, only apply to the first 100 square meters of the dwelling. It doesn’t matter how many family members live in the apartment to get the discount for the first 100 sq. meters but on-hand family size does play a role to determine if you meet the threshold for low income. The more family members that actually live in the apartment, the higher the threshold for low income since it is calculated per person.

Now, there is a strange arnona rule that has no basis in logic: One cannot get a discount in a larger-than-average apartment (more than 160 sq. Meters), even if they are legitimately financially strapped, unless one has a way larger than average family.

As I wrote before, I happen to have a way larger than average family and so I have this larger than average size apartment. And I am legitimately financially strapped. From my perspective, there is no reason not to receive the discount on the first 100 sq. meters. Not only that, but I have successfully applied and received the discount year after year since about 2013 (I bought this large apartment in 2012 when I really needed it). 

The value of the discount over the past few years was between 11,000-12,000 NIS. This inches up every year because it is a percentage of the base arnona price, which is raised every year. 

This arrangement was going well up to and including 2022. Throughout these years, several family members married and/or moved out but they are still my kids. Remember that for an average size apartment, for the first 100 meters, it makes no difference how many people are actually living in the apartment.

The Initial Tremors

Unexpectedly, in 2023, the Iriya decided to reject my application for a discount. Their one-line excuse was that the apartment is over 160 sq. meters. This is strange because it was the same size the year before and likewise ever since we bought it.

I immediately called an acquaintance who has connections and he advised me to contact Aryeh King. Aryeh King put me in touch with an official I will call Meir. I had several extended WhatsApp chats with Meir. Meir indicated the he filed on my behalf a request to the Hanacha Dept. for a review. He later said that he got feedback that my rejection was a mistake and it was now rectified. Except… that there is some malfunction with the Iriya computer system so it won’t show right away.

Based on this information, I coasted along waiting for an updated message from the Iriya. Several times when I contacted them, I was told that there is a technical problem with their computerized system and the matter is still “under evaluation”. Until that point, I had paid the Iryiya more than half of the projected discounted price. But when I heard that the system is broken and that my status is in limbo, I stopped any further payments. I didn’t want to sink money into a non-functional system.

I spent the rest of 2023 and the beginning of 2024 just waiting to receive an updated accounting, but it never happened. Sometime in March 2024, I applied again for the discount for the new year. Nowadays, this must be done every year. I figured that this year I would not have trouble getting the discount since the message from Meir was that the previous year was all a mistake, just that it wasn’t processed. I expected it to get processed now for both years. Throughout this time, I wasn’t paying.

In April 2024, I received an official rejection for the discount citing the same excuse. I again contacted Meir and he filed on my behalf a request for a review. I awaited a response and the matter simmered for almost six months until Nov. 2024. I then received another rejection, but this time, they fine-tuned their excuse. They wrote that the apartment is beyond 160 sq. meters and that the extended amount of family members that are required are not all living in the apartment.

The stipulation that all the family members need to be living in the apartment did not make any sense to me for several reasons. I will not elaborate on them, but in a nutshell, it is illogical, unrealistic and discriminatory. The discriminatory issue is the most important one. I wanted to challenge it.

All this time, I had still not submitted any further payments. I had also received notices from the Iriya about being delinquent in payments, but all this time, I was trying to resolve the discount issue so I could not comply with payment.

I promptly contacted Meir who was back from miluim but not at his office. He suggested that I go down physically to the Iriya. About two weeks later I asked Meir to provide me with the exact text of the arnona regulations. He didn’t do it. I then contacted the Iriya directly to send me the exact text of the regulations to confirm the unrealistic stipulation. I received it about Dec. 11, 2024. It says that a larger than average apartment must be in the possession of a family with a certain minimum of family members (quite a number) but it did not say that they all need to be living there. As I said, such a thing would be unreasonable and discriminatory.

About one week later I went personally to the Iriya and I showed them the regulations and told them it does not say that all the family members need to be living there. They very firmly told me that this is what it means. I told them it cannot mean that, and they said, well, it does. 

I asked them how can I submit a request to a formal appeal in front of a neutral panel or court? Their answer was to go online and submit a request to a destination called “Pniyot Hatzibur” (Inquiries of the Public). I said that I already did that and the system only allows me to file directly to the Hanacha Dept. The woman said, “No, there is an option for only Pniyot Hatzibur that is not the Hanacha Dept.”

I went home and accessed the website and saw an almost hidden link to Pniyot Hatzibur. I wrote my case and explained why I should qualify for the discount by having the required large family and that the language of the law does not indicate that all the family members need to be living in the apartment. At the end of this statement, I wrote that if the Iriya does not agree with me, I insist on the matter going to a neutral panel (or a judge in court, if necessary).

On Dec. 18, the Iriya acknowledged my inquiry and gave it Inquiry #2412-6476074. They said they will respond within 21 business days (i.e., a month). At some point in this timeline I told my wife that the Iriya is being obstinate but they haven’t cracked down on me for payment. The only way I can sue them in a court for the discount is as a response to being prosecuted. Until they crack down on me, there is nothing I can do. 

The Earthquake

Well, on Dec. 30, which is after I formally requested a third-party appeal and before I received a response to my inquiry, the Iriya cracked down. They declared a lien on my assets and froze my Israeli bank accounts. I didn’t know it until a few days later when I tried to do some banking. The banks told me I was under Ikul (a lien on the accounts). This came from the banks but not from the Iriya. I finally did receive a notice from the Iriya in the mail a few weeks later. 

As to be expected, the amount of the lien was the full amount that the Iriya wanted for the two years plus penalties for lateness. It was for a bit over NIS 41,000. My calculation was that from the discounted price minus the amount I initially paid in, I should be owing approximately NIS 17,000. Our discrepancy in dispute for these two years is now at about NIS 24,000. I already applied for the discount for 2025 and am waiting to see the results. Assuming that there is no change, the discrepancy jumps another NIS 12,000.

It's not just that it is NIS 36,000 that I prefer not to part with, it is NIS 36,000 that I don’t have. Period. The only moral way to get it would be to sponge off generous relatives for a long-term unsecured loan or a handout. I really don’t want to go that route. I don’t want to take anybody’s money for expenses that I don’t believe are legitimate in the first place.

An Ikul is a total nightmare and causes total paralysis. I certainly did not want this Ikul, but still it was the move I needed to enable me to fight City Hall. I felt that not only am I in the right about the discount, but that, from the perspective of the Iriya, the Ikul is totally illegal. This is because the discrepancy money is officially under dispute. In a civil society, money that is under dispute cannot be collected by enforcement until the debt is confirmed by a court. 

On Jan. 14, 2025, I wrote a new inquiry complaining that the Ikul is illegal since I previously requested a neutral appeal. This was sent as an inquiry to the Rosh HaIr (mayor). I received a confirmation that my inquiry is registered in the Collections Dept. as Inquiry #2501-6586443.

On Jan. 20, I received a response from the Hanacha Dept. which officially addressed Inquiry #2501-6586443. The Iriya doubled down on its position and wrote (emphasis mine – YH):

Further to the Discounts Department's response dated January 19, 2025, we would like to clarify once again that according to the State Economy Arrangements Regulations, 1993, an apartment with an area of over 160 square meters will not be granted a discount unless the property is occupied by a family with X or more children. The meaning of the word "occupied" in the context of your request for a discount is that the X number of children "occupy" the property, meaning that they physically reside in the property, and not that the family has X children.

Although they are obstinate, their letter actually helps my position. Here they are clearly admitting that the law does not say outright that all the children of the family must live there. This is merely the “meaning” or their interpretation. They call this “the context”. They also did not bring any other clauses from the law nor any logical arguments that support their interpretation. 

In the course of all this, my Google searches discovered that there is indeed an official system to demand a neutral appeal panel on an Arnona issue. In order to access the appeal panel, one must first file an “Objection” (Hasagah). This objection is assigned a reference number. If the objection is overruled, one can file for an appeal hearing but he must reference the Hasagah number.

I tried to file a Hasagah, but in the online system, they display a few limited choices for grounds for the Hasagah. Some examples are that you want to contest the registered size of the property or that you want to claim that you are not the party responsible for paying the arnona. The option to contest a rejection for a Hanacha was not on the list and there was no option for “None of the above” or “Other”. 

Well, I thought I would fudge it and choose the option for “Size of Property” and just type in my arguments for getting the discount in free text in the box that requests your case in free text. So I did.

Within 24 hours I received a reply from the Iriya which said that I am not eligible to file a Hasagah for my case because this is not one of the topics that is eligible for a Hasagah. Go figure! I did not even get a number and, as such, I was blocked from filing for an appeal.

This was it. The gloves are off. I can no longer work with the Iriya so I am forced to work against them. Not my choice.

My Course of Action

On the spiritual side of things, I enlisted HKBH. I added something in Shemona Esreh and took on Chapter 35 in Tehillim. I also implemented the Rabi Matya ben Charash segulah and maybe some others, Kivrei Tzaddikim including a kvittel to Reb Shayele in Kerestir, consultation with an Admor, a few of my last shekels to Tzedaka and, of course, the Kosel. In addition, my wife, who is the real tzadeikes, did her part as well. I also suddenly remembered that it’s been a while since I checked my tefillin. They were fine.

On the down-to-earth side of things, I consulted several lawyers. First, I spoke with some that I was friends with to get free advice. Most said they are not familiar with these types of cases. Yet, some “knew people” at the Iriya. Nothing came of it. I also contacted an organization dedicated to helping English speaking olim and residents navigate the Israeli bureaucracy called Chaim V’Chessed. They had no real advice for me. They couldn’t even point me to a suitable lawyer for this. 

Then, I looked up some lawyers that I did not know, but who seemed to deal in these types of matters. Most of them wished me luck but were not optimistic. Nobody argued my stance that there is ill logic and discrimination in the way the Iriya reads the law, but they said that the courts would probably accept their position regardless. I did find one lawyer who would take the case for about NIS 15,000 plus VAT. Others wouldn’t take it at all.

I thought it was worthwhile to pay this lawyer and fight the case, but I needed financing for this. Ironically, some generous relatives who were willing to put up some money to help me pay off the Iriya were not willing to give me anything for a lawyer. They also thought I don’t stand a chance in court and that the money would go to waste. 

I thought that caving to the Iriya is a bigger waste of money. I feel that (a) I am on the moral high ground, (b) the chances of winning are always not less than 50/50 – either I’ll win the case, or I won’t, (c) in case I do win the case, I can expect to be compensated for legal expenses, (d) as I wrote above, I enlisted HKBH.

First Miracle

There is a Jewish saying that I have genuinely come to appreciate: Don’t tell HKBH how big your problems are. Instead, tell your problems how big HKBH is.

After about six weeks of trying to find a decent lawyer and then trying to find the money for him, and coming up empty on the money side, I tried a bold move. I applied to the legal system for legal aid (free representation). I was not very optimistic about succeeding in this venture but, BE”H, succeed I did.

I was approved for legal aid and, I suppose based on my personal information, I was assigned to a chareidi lawyer who happens to live right in my neighborhood. I will call him Shimon. Legal aid means that I now have a lawyer to help me fight the case in court and it won’t cost me a nickel. Not only that, but the Israeli government is paying my lawyer to fight the Iryia (city government)!

Needless to say, I was very encouraged by the miraculous nature of this first development. I saw it as a sign from HKBH that something will work out. Shimon, on the other hand, was not very excited. He was in no way enthusiastic about my case. Like the others, he didn’t think I stood much of a chance. He also wasn’t certain that working on a case like mine is covered by the legal aid system. He also said that he does not have much expertise in this field and wanted to try to pass my case off to somebody else. He did everything to brush me off and all this ate up more precious time while suffering the Ikul.

A real team player.

I was spurred on by the fact that I had gotten this far with legal aid and was not about to give up or let Shimon off the hook. Truth be told, he is a very nice person. So, while he was trying to discourage me, he did not really want to let me down. He explained that the only way to file a complaint in court is to the Machozi (District Court). The lower courts do not handle this. The other lawyers told me this as well. Then Shimon told me that there is a procedure. The Machozi will not hear a case if it hasn’t already gone to the Municipal Appeal panel. 

I told him, “Been there, done that. They already blocked me with the Hasagah and I have their letter to prove it.”

“This is because you went through the online digital system. You need to go directly to the Appeal Panel.”

“Huh?? Go directly to the appeal panel? How do I do this?”

“Either you email them straight or hand deliver your complaint.”

“Fine, how do I do this?”

“I’ll get back to you.”

It took about two weeks of constant reminders. But, at long last, he emailed me a simple email address: vaadotarar@jerusalem.muni.il. 

Is that it? Why did that take so long?

It didn’t take me 24 hours to compose the text of the complaint. All I needed to do was to spruce up the language of the previous inquiries. I checked it with the lawyer and I polished the Hebrew with the assistance of one of my kids and out it went. At the close of the email to the Vaad, I wrote in red text to please confirm the receipt of this inquiry. All this took until April 3, 2025. Just a bit more than a week before Pesach.

The Second Miracle – The Big One

At this point, it helps to recap the dispute. The Iriya maintains that I must pay the full arnona price for the years 2023-24. Their calculation, including penalties, was upwards of NIS 41,000. As such, they placed a lien on my assets for that amount. I maintain that I qualify for the discounts which should put the unpaid amount at about NIS 17,000. As such there is no dispute over the lower amount, so a lien for that amount would be justified, but not for more. The discrepancy is about NIS 24,000 (USD $6,700).

Throughout this ordeal, I never dreamt that I could ever get out of the lien without paying out at least the non-disputed amount. Such would be totally unrealistic. I only think I should not be paying more than that. But HKBH is gracious and can do the unrealistic.

After I sent out the email with the complaint to the Appeal Committee, I had no idea what to expect. At worst, I might be totally ignored or receive a letter that I am not entitled to such an appeal. Then I would need to go to court.

On a more reasonable level, I expected to at least get a confirmation from the Iriya about the complaint and that they are “looking into it”. Perhaps, it would come with an invitation to a hearing on some designated futuristic date. 

On the optimistic side of the spectrum was the remote possibility that I would receive a notice that the Appeals Committee considered my arguments written in the complaint and will grant me the discounts even without a hearing. Of course, even in such a rosy scenario, at best, the lien would be lowered to the non-disputed amount which will need to be paid or secured. And I thought that all this would take weeks, maybe months.

None of these happened. What did happen?

Firstly, between April 3 and the commencement of Pesach (April 12) I did not receive any response from the Appeal Committee whatsoever. Not a grumble. Then, on the first day of Chol Hamoed Pesach, which in Israel is Nissan 16 (April 14), which I believe is the date when Haman went swinging, I received an SMS text from one of the two affected banks. The text read as follows:

Shalom. For your information, the lien in your name applied by the Iriya of Jerusalem Arnona dept. for case #xxxx and motion #xxxx has been cancelled. The cancellation relates to the lien that was assessed on 12/30/2024 for the amount of NIS 41,771.66. Be advised, if there are no other liens, all the restrictions that apply will be removed. Always at your service, Bank X.

What on earth? On Chol Hamoed?

But so it was. The lien was gone. No court case, no appeals hearing, not a penny to a lawyer and not even any arrangement for payment of the non-disputed amount. Gone!

I immediately tried to execute an electronic transfer which was a restricted action until now. I succeeded. I did not receive any notice from the other bank, but I checked my online account and, likewise, all the restrictions were off. Just like that.

On Chol Hamoed! The yahrtzeit of Haman Harasha!

What precisely happened at the Iriya? Was it my unacknowledged complaint? Was it received? Was it seen? Did it strike a chord? With whom? Why should it, all of a sudden? Was it not that but something else?

How is it that over all these months (years?), not a single person told me that I have a recourse to file a complaint with the city Appeal Committee? Not Meir who was assisting me, nor any other city official, nor anybody from the Chaim V’Chessed organization, and not any of several lawyers? Even Shimon only came up with it after weeks of wrangling. And he didn’t even write up or file the complaint, I did. It doesn’t even need a lawyer!

This could only be the Hand of G-d.

Like most religious Israeli residents, I try always to get to the Kosel on one of the days of Chol Hamoed. When I did it this year, I made sure to say Nishmas Kol Chai.

What now?

So, this is the story of my great miracle from HKBH. But there is more to come.

I remarked at the beginning of this post that the issue has not come any closer to being resolved. The lien is off and, for now, that’s it. The second day after Pesach ended, I contacted Shimon to tell him the good news and to ask his opinion on what to do next. He wished me Mazal Tov and told me, just as I expected, to just sit tight and wait and let the Iriya make the next move. It is now the first week of May and just over a full month from when I sent my complaint. I am still waiting.

So I hope this all comes to a happy ending and I have every reason to be optimistic. I don’t believe that HKBH wants His miracles to go to waste.

הודו לה' כי טוב, כי לעולם חסדו. 

לעושה נפלאות גדולות לבדו, כי לעולם חסדו.

Project Emesh 7 - Involuntary Arbitration

 

Author's note - Please see the previous Project Emesh post HERE as a preface for this one.

In our previous post, we listed several instruments of civil court litigation which are not a standard part of secular arbitration such as appeals, discovery and grounding the ruling. These legal tools were instituted in litigation in order to help reach fair and just outcomes. So, the looming question is: why would anybody prefer arbitration over court litigation when faced with the choice?

I can think of several reasons which apply to secular arbitration but may not apply as much to Batei Din. They are:

Speed – Arbitration is usually much quicker. Often times, years quicker. As they say, time is money. The sides want to resolve their problem and move on.

Cost – as indicated in the last post, if it helps cut out lawyers’ services, it can be much less expensive. The only reason it may cost more is they need to pay high rates for the arbitration itself. But even this expense comes with a silver lining because the sides who are paying the arbitrator have a certain amount of joint leverage to get him to move along. After all, unlike a judge, they are covering his bills. He is working for them.

Selectivity – In litigation, one cannot choose the judge or decide on a panel of judges. In arbitration, the sides jointly choose how many arbitrators and who they are. This is crucially important when there is a disparity between the litigants such as race, religion, gender, or any other orientation (liberal vs. conservative). If one side is black and one white or male vs. female (or white male vs. black female) and there is only one judge, it can make a whale of a difference what kind of person is the judge. 

Judges can have reputations in terms of being experienced, fair, just, unbiased or not and so can arbitrators. Hence, arbitrators can be chosen to match the interests of the sides. When the sides have conflicting interests, they can customize a panel where one arbitrator may lean to the orientations of one side and another to the second and a third tie breaker. 

No intimidation – Although arbitrators have some potent legal powers by laws of arbitration, such as to subpoena witnesses, they do not have legal authority of enforcement. They cannot dictate when the sessions will take place if they are inconvenient to the sides, and they cannot put litigants in “contempt of court” for disobeying them and levy fines or throw anybody in jail. As such, the litigants will not feel intimidated by the arbitrators. 

Better odds for each side – As we noted, the arbitrator is not basing his ruling [exclusively] on [the letter of] the law, but more on logic and fair play. Firstly, this is the reason why there is less of a need for lawyers. Additionally, a side that does not have the law squarely in his corner has reason to hope for a better result than he will get in court.

Customization – Remember how I noted that arbitration does not have some of the standard legal tools that we get in court? Well, they may not be standard, but they can all be implemented. Arbitration agreements can be drawn up to include all or some of these tools. The sides can agree to have a third-party appeal system and/or discovery, summations, detailed rulings, just like in court. They are paying for this arbitration, so they call the shots. If an arbitrator doesn’t like to work this way, the sides can shop around for other ones. In general, most private arbitrators, who need to pay their own mortgages, will not be fussy about these things. As such, this list of drawbacks to arbitration are not really drawbacks. All the tools are available.

So, we can look at this list as reasons why litigants may prefer arbitration over court when faced with the choice. This is very effective when both sides recognize the validity of the dispute, and their goal is to get it resolved. 

Of course, this is not always the case. Litigants are usually not very good friends and sometimes they are downright hostile. In that case, the dispute will probably go straight to court. After all, taking the case to court is the default course of action. Arbitration is an alternative. Thus, in most cases of secular arbitration, arbitration is jointly accepted by the sides because it better serves their individual interests.

To throw in one more upside, since the arbitration is agreed by both sides, it is more likely that the loser will freely comply with the ruling and there won’t be a need to turn to the courts for enforcement.

Sadly, Dinei Torah are not as “rosy”. The sides are not going to arbitration because they prefer to. In fact, one or both sides may prefer the old Choshen Mishpat style Dinei Torah or even secular court. In today’s world they are forced into arbitration. Because of this, many of the advantages listed above don’t apply as much or at all. 

Here is how they line up:

Speed – There is no arguing that a Din Torah will be light years faster than going to court in reaching a ruling, so this advantage holds. BUT…this only applies to the ruling. Remember what I just said about litigants being hostile. Most Dinei Torah are not based on mutual consent. A nitva is never interested to go to Beis Din.

So, if the ruling is in the nitva’s favor and he doesn’t have to pay anything, that will end it all quickly. But if he needs to pay money or return the merchandise or revise his building plans, he may not be so eager to comply. The case may need to go to court to be enforced and can get set back for a while. If a toveah knows he is dealing with a potentially recalcitrant opponent, a Din Torah may make things go slower than if he went straight to court.

Cost – This one usually applies. The standard Batei Din are usually supported by Kehillos or organizations which subsidize the system. Devoted dayanim work for very low pay or none at all. This is one area where there is not much to complain about in the Beis Din system.

Selectivity – All dayanim are Jewish males, so if you are a Jewish male, there won’t be much conflict. However, a Chassidish Beis Din may not work like a Litvish Beis Din and a Religious Zionist Beis Din not like a Chareidi Beis Din and if you are not Lubavitch you probably won’t want a Lubavitcher Beis Din, especially if your opponent is Lubavitch. 

In a Din Torah, the toveah (claimant) is the injured party and the one who wants the Din Torah. The nitva (defendant) couldn't care less. Unfortunately, the toveah doesn’t get to pick the Beis Din. The toveah can open the case in any Beis Din that he feels comfortable at, but the nitva can move it anywhere else. Also, if the toveah and nitva do not live in the same location, the toveah needs to go to where the nitva is. 

This is a long discussion that will probably warrant a complete post. 

Another thing, choosing a Beis Din does not mean there is any flexibility to choose any specific dayanim (if there are more than just three on the roster).

So, although there may be some control, it is very limited. 

Now, there happens to be a way around this problem, but it isn’t simple. I am sure many readers heard about a Zabl"a Beis Din. I wrote about it about half a year ago in this post (HERE). 

A Zabl"a Beis Din personifies the exact system I outlined in secular arbitration where the two sides build a panel of arbitrators and each litigant chooses one for himself. Although this does carries all the inherent advantages, it also carries a lot of issues. Here is what I wrote last May:

Although the Zabl"a procedure is still available today, it is very rarely used. A Zabl"a court is not so practical to set up since it involves a lot of time and bickering between the two sides. It can only work when both sides agree to go to Beis Din and this doesn’t usually happen until after the nitva receives a summons from an established Beis Din. Secondly, a makeshift Beis Din is usually not equipped with a mazkir or safra d’dayana or any staff or equipment or even a place to hold court. Thirdly, Zabl”a dayanim generally charge good money for their time and effort and they become prohibitively expensive.

Intimidation – As I wrote above, the salaries of the dayanim, if there is any, is usually subsidized by outside sources. As such, the dayanim are in no way beholden to the litigants. An arbitrator is not a judge, but a dayan is always a dayan. A dayan is a Halachic judge even if he is, in effect, doing arbitration. He has the Halachic authority of a dayan and all the powers given by Shulchan Aruch. Any directive or sanctions that a dayan (or BD) imposes is valid. Technically, a dayan – or, for sure, a Beis Din – can impose a nidui or cherem on a recalcitrant baal din. (Baruch Hashem, this is not done today. It's too daunting for all those involved.)This is no game. Dayanim can be very intimidating.

Odds for Each Side – We will see in future posts that in a Beis Din, the chips are generally stacked in favor of the nitva. It is hard for a toveah to win a case in Beis Din. I can tell you this firsthand. I think a toveah will get a better shake in a secular court.

Customization – In essence, this is what I am fighting for in Project Emesh. As it stands, all Batei Din have their standard arbitration agreements which are universally devoid of any special tools or protections of the litigants. No allowances for appeals, summations, discovery, grounded rulings, expenses or anything. And they are not interested in making changes. They don’t even want you to read it up front.

If you fight for some of these things you may get them, but it will probably be a “fight”. One of the goals of Project Emesh is to make these tools more standard and available.

Sof davar, assuming there was a choice whether or not to take your dispute to Beis Din, Beis Din won’t always look like the better deal. We may even uncover more reasons for this in upcoming posts. This isn’t how it used to be, but this is the way it is today. So, the question comes up: 

What if I prefer secular court over Beis Din? What if both of us prefer secular court over Beis Din? Do I really have to go to Beis Din?

We will deal with this in the near future, IYH.

Project Emesh 6 - The Lowdown on Arbitration

Author's note - Please see the previous Project Emesh post HERE as a preface for this one.

So far, we have learned that in today’s age, a Din Torah is binding arbitration and not Jewish adjudication.

 

What is the significance of this fact?

We need to know what arbitration really is in the outside world. As such, for most of our discussion in this post, I will be talking about common arbitration in the secular world.

 

In my previous post, we discussed the primary distinction between court litigation (adjudication) and arbitration. The first thing we said is that, in arbitration, the sides mutually agree to allow the arbitrator to settle the dispute to his – the arbitrator’s – liking. In essence, they are giving the arbitrator the power of a judge. But, in some ways, the arbitrator has more power than a judge. 

How so?

By common universal law, an arbitrator’s ruling cannot be challenged by either side. 

Why not?

Because both sides agreed to listen to whatever he said. If they agreed to listen to him, that’s what they need to do. It doesn’t matter if he is right or wrong or if his ruling does not concur with local laws. This is as long as it does not blatantly contradict or violate the local laws.

What this means is that, by default, a decision by an arbitrator is not subject to an appeal before any outside body. It is final. A court cannot overrule the decision of an arbitrator by discrediting the merits of his decision. A court can only intervene on the ruling of an arbitrator for technicalities, such as in the following cases:

• The arbitrator violated the conditions of the Arbitration Agreement in his case.

• The arbitrator violated the common laws of arbitration – for example: the arbitrator did not allow one of the sides to evaluate or respond to evidence brought by the opposing party.

• The ruling can be deemed to be overtly unjust or unreasonable – for example: if an arbitrator blatantly ignores or contradicts the clearly stated terms of a contract that is being disputed.

• The arbitration directly involves a party who is not a party to the arbitration – for example: if an award is reimbursed by insurance or the dispute involves property which is co-owned by a spouse or partner who did not consent to the arbitration.

• The arbitration award exceeds the amount that is under dispute.

If one of the above happens, the aggrieved party can go to court to request that the arbitration be totally vacated. The court may agree and vacate, or send the case back to arbitration with instructions to remedy the complaint and proceed accordingly. Nevertheless, the standard right to appeal that is part of adjudication in most countries does not apply to arbitration. 

There are several other standard features that are a part of court litigation that are not standards of arbitration. However, many of these can be implemented in arbitration with the mutual agreement of all three parties. Remember that at this point, I am discussing common secular arbitration. Here is a short list:

Appeals

As previously mentioned, there is no automatic right or method to appeal a ruling. It is always possible for one to request the arbitrator to review the ruling and to change it, but this is up to the arbitrator. It cannot be demanded. Also, he will be reviewing his own ruling. There will not be a “fresh set of eyes”.

Even a review comes with restrictions. It may be surprising that, once an arbitrator gives a ruling, he is very limited on how and for how long he can make changes and what kind of changes he can make. Basically, the aggrieved party has a limited time to request a review (this is the same with appeals) and the arbitrator has a limited time to change his ruling. Moreover, in general, he cannot fully vacate his own ruling. He can only confer modifications, corrections, and fill in things he omitted.

 

Still, because there is not any oversight on arbitration, an arbitrator can overturn his own ruling and it will stand as long as the newly aggrieved party does not challenge him in court. This really applies to all of the shenanigans an arbitrator can pull off. He can bend the rules of arbitration and, so long as nobody challenges him in court, it will stand. We will see later how all this plays out in Beis Din.

In any case, if all parties agree, a system of appeal can be specified in the Arbitration agreement.

Grounds for Award (Transparency)

In court, a judge must present the legal grounds (reasons) for his ruling. There are two reasons for this. One is to justify that the ruling complies with the local law. Included in this is the need to clear up potential contradictions with other court rulings in similar cases. The other reason is to enable the aggrieved party to appeal to a higher court if they claim the law was misapplied (and when they discover contradictions in court rulings of similar cases).

Neither of these reasons apply to arbitration. Arbitration does not need to comply with local law. Also, there is no standard right to appeal. 

Despite this, some jurisdictions do indeed require an arbitrator to ground his ruling as the default. I would assume this is for just plain transparency. This requirement can only be disregarded if the parties agree to waive the grounds in the Arbitration agreement. 

In many others, the default is that the arbitrator does not need to ground his ruling unless (a) the Arbitration agreement specifies that he needs to ground his ruling or (b) the Arbitration agreement allows for some system of appeal. 

In Israel, the default is that the Arbitrator does not need to ground his ruling as long as they did stipulate it or agree to allow for appeals. As a rule, all Batei Din rely on this default, yet they still insert this waiver into their Arbitration agreements. 

Why?

Because the Shulchan Aruch says that they do need to ground their rulings. The Batei Bin want you to waive this Halachic requirement.

This is a long discussion and a major problem. We will discuss it in a future post.

Protocols or Court transcripts

Courts record the proceedings in court protocols. These records are very useful. There is no requirement for this feature in secular arbitration. However, this is one thing that is a standard in Halachic arbitration (i.e., Dinei Torah) because it is a tradition of Beis Din and is noted in Choshen Mishpat 13:3.

Summations

Summations are vitally important. I intend to devote a full post on this subject later. This is a standard feature of court litigation but there is no requirement to allow summations in arbitration. As such, an impatient arbitrator can bar the sides from presenting summations. I think it is necessary to stipulate for allowing summations in every arbitration agreement. You certainly won’t find them in a standard Beis Din agreement.

Discovery (or Disclosure)

This is another feature that is standard in court litigation and is totally expendable in arbitration. Discovery can be a double-edged sword. It can hurt one side or the other more than it helps them, so some parties may prefer to be without them. Either way, an arbitrator is authorized to subpoena any side to present documents in question.

Witness Testimony

This is a sticky one. On the one hand, an arbitrator has the authority to regulate or manage how evidence is presented. As such, he may make his own rules (unless otherwise stipulated) and disallow calling witnesses. On the other hand, one core tenet of arbitration is that each side must be allowed to present whatever evidence he has to prove his case. In other words, an arbitrator cannot really bar a party from bringing live witnesses, but he might try to get away with it. If he does, the only way to fight it is to bring the case into court.

Just like documents, an arbitrator indeed has the power to subpoena non-party witnesses to arbitration. However, it is very difficult for an arbitrator to sanction a witness who doesn’t comply. So, if you need a witness who may be reluctant to show, you can’t depend on arbitration to make sure it happens. 

In Dinei Torah, if they want to subpoena a religious person who respects Beis Din, a frum Jew is required to show up (if he is in the vicinity), but if you need a reluctant non-Orthodox or non-Jewish person to testify, a Beis Din won’t have much clout.

Third party involvement

Court litigation does not need to concern itself if a judgement affects a third party such as insurance, an employer, a business partner, or current or ex-spouse. In all likelihood, they will be either involuntarily named as a party or invited to the litigation. In arbitration, only the sides in dispute have agreed to this process, not any outsiders. You cannot name an outsider as a third party to an arbitration against their will. Thus, if the case must involve a third party who doesn’t want to join in, the arbitration cannot proceed. Hence, if you want to sue a person who is insured, it cannot be done via arbitration unless, for some reason, the insurance company consents to arbitration.

Expenses

In court litigation, it is standard to figure in to the final judgement reasonable legal expenses such as court costs, attorney’s fees, and compensation for witnesses. As such, a claimant who is smug about his case can hire a reasonably priced lawyer to represent him and hope to get compensated if he wins. In secular arbitration, all this is up to the arbitrator. He may or may not award expenses. 

As mentioned in a previous post, many arbitrations end up in imposed settlements or compromises so there is no justification to award expenses to either side even if they spent a wad on lawyers (or toanim). Similarly, many people who go to arbitration do so to settle the dispute based on logic, but not based exclusively on the law. As such, they have no need for a lawyer since the letter of the law is not the determining factor.

Batei Din typically refrain from ever awarding expenses. You may want to engage a toen or a lawyer but, unlike secular court that expects representation, Beis Din is not interested that you have one. In their eyes, you don’t need one. So, don’t expect to ever get a penny of compensation for them. 

Enforcement

Secular courts can enforce their rulings. Arbitrators cannot. The only way to get an arbitration award enforced is by going to court to certify the ruling. Then it can be enforced just like any court ruling. 

The other side is given the right to respond to the certification request. Although it is not easy to do, he has the opportunity to challenge the ruling and try to get it overturned or vacated. This can become a second court battle, and the winning party might need to engage a lawyer, and may actually lose. Even if he doesn’t lose, which is normally the case, the whole process is exhausting, time-consuming and could cost some money. Winning arbitration and collecting is not always Easy Street. 

Costs

This can go either way. Often, the sides opt for arbitration because it is less expensive than litigation (or they think it will be). This is especially the case if they do not plan to hire lawyers. However, by secular arbitration, more often, it is the opposite.

 

Most court litigation involves a standard court fee and processing and nothing more. Court judges are employed by the State and are not paid for their time by the litigants. The big money is in legal representation, but even for this, the winning side is usually at least partially compensated. One side benefit of all this is that a judge has no incentive to drag out the proceedings.

Arbitrators are private citizens and they usually charge very impressive fees for their time. The more arbitrators there are, the more it costs. The more time it takes, the more it costs. Thus, in the secular world, it is very typical that arbitrators will drag out the cases in order to get paid more money. In some cases, it is deviously intentional. In others, it is sub-conscious, but it is human nature that even affects the most honest of us. 

As such, a lengthy arbitration can cost way more than court. Add to this lawyers or toanim, if applicable, where they are also paid for their time and are in no hurry to get the case resolved. And don’t forget enforcement, if needed. For these expenses, it is questionable if they will see any of it back. Secular arbitration can easily cost more than the money in dispute. 

Incidentally, the same thing applies to mediation. Mediators are also private citizens who take sizable fees for their time and can cost each side a bundle. But there is a big difference. In mediation, the parties in dispute call the shots. Each party has the right to spontaneously terminate the mediation at any time for any reason. If anyone feels that the mediator is dragging things out or is no longer cost effective, they can unilaterally terminate and cut their losses. Likewise, the running meter incentivizes the sides to get down to business and resolve their issue the sooner the better.

In arbitration, the arbitrator calls the shots. Once the agreement is signed, they are beholden to the arbitrator until the end. Neither side can back out unilaterally. If he prolongs it, they are stuck. What’s more, hurrying the procedures may not be in their best interests because haste makes waste.

Baruch Hashem, the Batei Din know that religious Jews are bound to Halachic arbitration and do not have an option for secular court under regular conditions. As such, they endeavor to make the costs for Dinei Torah as low as possible. 

The dayanim are usually working pro-bono or are paid sparingly for their time by the kehillah or organization that is sponsoring their Beis Din. As a result, costs are low for the litigants. Unfortunately, working for little or no pay often causes the dayanim to get very impatient to hurry the case along and, as we already said, haste makes waste. 

So now, after this very depressing list of drawbacks, why would anyone opt to go to arbitration?

And…is it good for the Jews or bad for the Jews?

We will save this for an upcoming post.

Project Emesh 5 – What is a Din Torah [in Today’s World]?

In my opening post on this series, I wrote:

This is a project to educate readers about Beis Din. What it is and what it isn’t; how it works and how it should work; what every person should know before they call for a Din Torah or before they respond to being called; and how to avoid getting hurt.

Most people who haven't been to a Din Torah, even the most learned among us, don’t have a clue.

So, let’s get started. Go around your community and ask the following question: What is a Din Torah?

You will get two types of answers. Type 1 will come from consumers who are full of assumptions and misconceptions. Type 2 will come from those who have “been there”.

So what is the Type 1 answer?

A consumer will answer that a Din Torah is a court case that is presided by three Jewish judges and follows the laws of Judaism.

In other words, it’s the same thing as suing somebody in a secular court in front of a non-Jewish judge or jury, but this happens to be in front of a panel of Jewish judges and the laws being scrutinized are our Jewish ones instead of the national ones. In English, this process is called adjudication.

This sounds about right. In fact, this is what those of us who have gone to Yeshiva and learned Bava Kamma and Bava Metziah and Kesubos and Sanhedrin will think it is because this is what is described in the Talmud. Jewish court.

Well, these folks are behind the times. This is what a Din Torah used to be and what a Din Torah should be even today, but no longer. It doesn’t apply to today’s world. This is why we pray each day for השיבה שופטנו כבראשונה. 

We want Dinei Torah to be just like they used to be.

The Type 2s who have more experience will spell it out. In today’s day and age, a Din Torah is Halachic arbitration. It is not adjudication. You are not in court. You are in front of an arbitration panel. Binding arbitration. The three learned Jewish men with long beards that scowl at you are not judging the case. They are arbitrating a dispute. Legally, and to a certain extent even Halachically, they are not judges. They are arbitrators.

But we still call them dayanim. Hence, all the confusion.

What is the difference between adjudication and arbitration?

Before I answer this, we may as well throw into the mix a third method of settling disputes which is called mediation. In mediation, the dispute is not being judged and not being arbitrated. It is being mediated. 

So, what are these three methods? Let’s check some online definitions.

Adjudication - Adjudication refers to the legal process of resolving a dispute or deciding a case. When a claim is brought, courts identify the rights of the parties at that particular moment by analyzing what were, in law, the rights and wrongs of their actions when they occurred.

Arbitration - Arbitration is a procedure in which a dispute is submitted, by agreement of the parties, to one or more arbitrators who make a binding decision on the dispute. In choosing arbitration, the parties opt for a private dispute resolution procedure instead of going to court.

Mediation - Mediation involves the intervention of a third person, or mediator, into a dispute to assist the parties in negotiating jointly acceptable resolution of issues in conflict. The parties do not reach a resolution unless all sides agree.

To briefly summarize, adjudication is a legal process of settling disputes according to the law. The defendant does not need to consent to adjudication. It can be carried out forcibly and the defendant can be summoned. Arbitration is not a legal process, although it has legal validity. It occurs when both sides mutually agree to abide by the ruling of the arbitrator(s). Once they consent to arbitration, the sides are bound to the ruling of the arbitrator. Mediation is also not a legal process and is not legally binding unless the sides forge a formal agreement which is then documented as a contracted agreement.

In the famous ground-breaking book on mediation – Getting to Yes by Roger Fisher and William Ury – the authors dramatize the difference as follows:

Suppose two siblings are fighting over the last orange in the refrigerator. Each one wants the entire orange for themselves and claims ownership – זה אומר כולה שלי וזה אומר כולה שלי.

The purpose of the judge is to decide which litigant’s claim is more valid by law. He will rule that either Party A gets the entire orange or Party B gets the entire orange.

The purpose of the arbitrator is to settle the dispute. He has a lot of flexibility. Even if he thinks that one person’s claim is somewhat stronger than the other’s, he may feel that the best thing to do is to divide the orange fifty-fifty. This will not necessarily satisfy the sides, especially the one with the stronger claim, but it does indeed settle the dispute. 

The purpose of the mediator is to see if there is a way to make both sides relatively satisfied. So, he may ask one sibling why he/she wants the orange. The response may be that he/she wants to drink a cup of orange juice. Then he will ask the other side the same question. Let’s say that the other sibling says that they want to bake a cake and the recipe calls for the rind of an orange grated up. 

In such a fortuitous situation, the mediator will suggest that the first sibling takes the orange to squeeze the juice and then gives the rinds to the second one for the cake. Even if they both want juice, maybe one side can be “bought off” with a dollar or a plate of ice cream or some other external compensation.

In any case, we see that adjudication (din) is the strictest method and follows the letter of the law. Typically, judges are very quick to suggest arbitration or mediation so that there can be mutual consent at some level, or they may even suggest compromises (settlements) on their own. But all too often, one or both sides will not hear of it. They know their case and they know the law and they do not want to open the door to settlements that will give them less than they think they deserve. 

As such, adjudication is the legal standard of settling disputes. So much so, that any normal human society has a court system where a claimant can summon a defendant for litigation whether the defendant wants to or not. In fact, this is one of the seven laws of Noach and is incumbent upon all human societies worldwide. Every normal society must and does have a functioning court system to settle disputes.

Except ours.

Don’t get me wrong. The Jewish court system described in Sanhedrin and Bava Kama and Bava Metziah and Choshen Mishpat are exactly that. And uninformed (consumer) Jews who have never been to Beis Din think that this is what it is today.

But, sadly, no longer. Our Batei Din for monetary disputes are all arbitration panels, not Jewish courts. Every one of them, whether in Israel or the galus. In Israel, the family courts have the authority of a legal court, so they have differences. But for monetary disputes, only arbitration.

Why is this?

The answer is that this is one of the travails of being in galus. Even here in Israel. 

We Jews are guests in other countries with other laws and procedures than we have. Generally, every country has government generated civil courts and legal systems and those systems are the only ones authorized to adjudicate disputes. Even here in Israel. Also, every legal system requires an umbrella of law enforcement – shoftim v’shotrim. Without being able to enforce court rulings, the courts are powerless. (See Rambam Hilchos Deos 4:23 – Every city must have a בית דין מכין וחובשין. This means a BD that can enforce its rulings.)

We Jews have no mechanism of enforcing court rulings. Probably, we would not obtain the legal authorization even if we had. As such, when a Jewish court issues a ruling, it must rely on the local law enforcement authorities to enforce the ruling. However, secular legal systems will only enforce rulings that are issued by their own system and comply with their own laws. The rulings of private courts as an adjudicated legal ruling is invalid. 

However, all normal societies recognize arbitration as a legal alternative to adjudication. This is as long as the litigants are following the host countries laws of arbitration. Generally, the laws say that two people can mutually agree to choose anybody they want to arbitrate their dispute, and they must sign a legal arbitration agreement. An arbitration agreement is like any contract between two (or three) parties. Thus, when they agree to binding arbitration and the arbitrator issues a ruling, the ruling can be presented to the court and certified as a legal court ruling. This is the same as when two parties in court do an out-of-court settlement. 

At that point, there is now a legal court ruling recognized by the State which is subject to enforcement by the State’s authorities. Only now can the ruling of Beis Din be enforced.

All this means that every monetary Din Torah that takes place is doing so with the full agreement of both parties. This alleviates a very dangerous hazard. If a Beis Din would act like a court and unilaterally summon a defendant to their court and issue a ruling against them, the defendant has the power by the law of the land to sue these unauthorized imposters for illegal theft and extortion and whatever else.  

Of course, this opens up the question: What if the defendant (nitva) refuses to sign up for this arbitration?

The answer is that Beis Din is relatively powerless. They cannot even issue a seiruv with any punitive clause for fear of getting sued in court. Whenever you hear of a seiruv, it is nothing more than an announcement that this person declined to show up in court. If it is punitive, threatening, or it damages the nitva in any way, they can get into big legal trouble. 

But what Beis Din can do is to issue a hetter erkaos. This is a permit for the claimant to take the case to the authorized secular court where it can be adjudicated against his will. But even this is not so simple. It may depend on why the nitva does not want to sign up.

If the reason is due to outright defiance of Beis Din, BD can issue the hetter with no qualms. But if the nitva does not like this Beis Din and wants a different one, or does not like the terms of the arbitration agreement, or has other objections, Beis Din needs to try to work them out before it can issue a hetter.

We will discuss these things in detail in future posts.

Similarly, there may be reasons that the claimant (toveah) would not want to take his claim to secular court. Perhaps, there will be more expenses and long delays or fears of corruption or antisemitism. Perhaps, he suspects that the nitvah, who would not have the audacity to lie in front of a Beis Din, would not hesitate to lie through his teeth in secular court.  Perhaps, this type of case is one where there is a stronger claim by Jewish law than by secular law.

In that case, either he bites the bullet and goes anyway to secular court or he walks away. He is stuck. We are in galus.

This is just one of the drawbacks of being required to go to arbitration instead of a legal court. But there are quite a few others that I did not discuss here. I intend to do so in an upcoming post.

With the drawbacks of arbitration that were mentioned here and the additional players to be named later, the biggest question of all pops up.

Q. I don’t want arbitration, I want judgement. I want din! How do I get it?

A. Not from any Jewish Beis Din.

Q. In that case, I prefer to take my case directly to a secular court. Can I do that?

A. If it’s the type of claim that a standard Beis Din can handle, no you cannot. If it is something that Batei Din do not handle at all, yes you can (we’ll elaborate on this later.) For anything in between, you will need to ask your local Orthodox Rabbi (I am happy to give you my opinion, but I am not any kind of Rabbi.)

To summarize, one of the primary reasons that our current Beis Din system is so flawed is because it is not adjudication but arbitration, and there is no way around this. The arbitration system is a very flawed system, and I intend to explain why in the upcoming posts. We have yet to see how bad it can get. We are in for a bumpy ride.

We are still in galus.

 

Project Emesh 4 - My Predecessors - Rate My Beit Din and L’Chatchila

 

Project Emesh is meant to be a very ambitious project. 

In my previous posts I noted the two primary goals:

• To educate the consumerist public about how the system works and how to use it successfully. 
  
  
• To serve as or to establish some kind of regulatory body which will oversee all affiliated Batei Din. Any Beis Din that won’t be affiliated with this umbrella agency will be considered an outcast. 

The education part will be a bit tedious. The reason the general population is so ignorant about Batei Din is because this is a subject that most people really do not care to know about. It is not a routine part of their lives, and they have no need to know it…until they do. Alas, there is much to know and it takes a bit of work.

At the end of this series, I intend to present a list of reforms that will help simplify the education process. One of the reforms is that either the individual Batei Dinim, or the “regulatory body” that I hope to establish, will produce a standard pamphlet of procedures and do’s and don’t’s that should be made available to anyone who is facing a Din Torah. This would be just like the concise guides that we have on Hilchos Yichud, Bris Milah and Trumos, Maaseros, and Shmittah.

As for the establishment of a regulatory body, this is meant to include such things as an independent court for appeals (a very big subject) and an ethics committee. Doubtless, this requires a lot of cooperation from a lot of erudite people who, by nature, only like to do things “their way”. This is a very tall order.

After these, I added a third, less important, goal:

• At some point, I would like to create a database of specific Batei Din and rate their efficiency and compliance.

This is meant to be a means of gathering input from the public at large who have used the Batei Din in order to identify issues that need to be dealt with, and to determine which Batei Din are more reliable and which are less so.

Do any of these things already exist? Did anybody beat me to it?

Believe it or not, the answer is Yes, but not where I think they need to be. 

I have spent more than enough time in chareidi Batei Din and I also trained to be a Toen Rabani and I have not heard a whisper of anything like this in our Batei Din. As such, I assumed they did not exist at all anywhere. 

But just to be certain, I did my due diligence and research and, surprisingly, I came across two prototype models to my aspirations that are being tried out in the kipa-seruga [chareidi] dati-leumi (Chardali) and modern-Orthodox circles. One of these is an existing regulatory body and the other is an existing rating system for Batei Din. 

Yep, they beat us to it. And they are a sure-fire sign that I am not the only one who recognizes a need for these things and that they are doable. They are already being done.

Let’s see what they are.

Rate My Beit Din

In the realm of a rating system for Batei Din, I stumbled across Rate My Beit Din.

Here are the basics of Rate My Beit Din from their website:

Rate My Beit Din is a revolutionary user based review site for the divorce department of batei din (Jewish Religious Courts) around the world.

Transparency in the Divorce Process

Think of us as “Yelp” for batei din. Our goal is simple: to increase transparency in the Jewish Divorce process. Our site includes features such as general information about each court, cost for the divorce process in that court, average response time, and whether or not people have had good experiences with a particular beit din. The site also aims to hold batei din accountable for this process by making these reviews public.

Objective Beit Din Ratings

Ratings are based on hard data compiled from the “Beit Din Experience Survey”, as well as professional evaluations of the beit din. Each page and beit din are rated according to the same questions and criteria.

Rate My Beit Din is a project of Chochmat Nashim in collaboration with organizations and individuals around the world seeking to end Get abuse, Get refusal and to return integrity to Jewish marriage and divorce.

In case you are not familiar with Chochmat Nashim, here is a blurb from Wikipedia:

Chochmat Nashim (Hebrew: חכמת נשים) is an Israeli organisation that promotes women's rights in the Orthodox Jewish community in Israel and the United States. Their work aims to raise awareness of trends and policies within Orthodoxy that might harm women and girls. The group's activities include the establishment of a photo bank which includes the images of Orthodox women, and the use of satirical publications which mimic Jewish Torah study aimed at educating Orthodox men about the unequal treatment of Jewish women in religious divorce proceedings.

In short, it is an Orthodox Jewish women's advocacy group far to the left. On the Wikipedia page there is a sidebar that sports the title: Part of a series of articles on Jewish feminism

This is not my cup of tea.

Incidentally, I don’t think that the person who wrote the description for Wikipedia is very fond of the organization.

Rate My Beit Din is not relevant or useful to my cause for several reasons:

• It is only addressing the Family Batei Din (Divorce courts) and not the Monetary Batei Din. I want a very similar system for the monetary Batei Din.

• It is a feature of a left-wing organization which does not display on its website any Rabbinical endorsements or alliances even from Modern or centrist Rabbis.
  
  
  
• The rating is highly unreliable due to its gender bias. What I mean is this. The goal of Chochmat Nashim is to make the divorce process more favorable to women. Even though much of their substance is presented in an egalitarian setting, since abuse can go both ways, the site is clearly women-oriented. It’s not called Chochmat Nashim for nothing. 
  
  

When it conducts the surveys, it allows anyone, male or female, to participate and submit a review. Nonetheless, we can assume that the overwhelming majority of respondents will be women. Especially since one of the categories is, “Felt pressured by the BD to exchange something for Get.” Thus, the rating will not reflect how capable the Beis Din is in general but rather, how efficient it is for assisting the women based on their personal experience. We can also assume that, for the same couples, the men would rate the Beis Din based on their expectations and experiences which may be the inverse of the wife’s.

 

As a result, let’s take for example the CRC of Chicago which got 4 stars with 10 reviews and compare it with RCC California which merited 2 stars after 16 reviews. If the reviews were predominantly from the women, it’s possible that a consensus of men would give CRC Chicago 2 stars and RCC California 4 stars for the same performance. And it may also be, that neither rating would accurately reflect the overall professionalism of the Batei Din from a Halachic point of view.

 

• Another issue is that they are quick to list the Batei Dinim and display the ratings even after only one or two reviews. This can easily mislead a leader who sees a five-star rating or a one-star rating and does not realize that, in each case, only one person submitted a review. There should be some sort of minimum number of reviews before a Beis Din can be rated.

All that said, Rate My Beit Din does indeed mirror the system I would like to see in Batei Din for Mammonos. The important thing is that it lets the relevant Batei Dinim know that they are being watched and evaluated. I am gratified that there is a prototype up and running for this.

L’Chatchila

A ratings system is just the icing on the cake. As I wrote before, the more important goals are oversight, regulation, transparency, and a method of keeping the litigants informed of rules, regulations, procedures, rights and obligations. Most of the time, the litigants are only told of their obligations during run-time and they are not told of their rights at all.

I also wrote that after all my years here in Eretz Israel and my experience in this field, if I am not aware of the existence of any such regulatory body, then there probably isn’t one. 

Not so.

Although there are not any long-standing, well-established organizations, it turns out that there is something very recent that looks to be promising. This is a very nascent organization that was only first established in 2021 to unify a group of already existing Batei Din in the Chardali communities in Israel (only) into a network. We are talking about the Batei Din of places like Beit-El, Eli, Kochav Yaakov, Mitzpeh Yericho, Kiryat Ono, Kiryat Arba, Psagot, Maaleh Adumim, Gush Etzion, Karnei Shomron, you get the idea.

It is actually the reincarnation of another organization created in 2018 by the same people. It seems that the original version petered out during Corona and is dead in the water and it was reincarnated to the newer version. 

But before 2018, there was nothing at all.

The name of the organization is L’Chatchila (לכתחילה - מערך בתי דין לממונות). You can see their original website HERE.

The earlier organization was called Igud Batei Din L’Mammonos (Union of Batei Din for Financial Claims) איגוד בתי דין לממונות. I suppose we can now call it Bediavad. See their website HERE.

As you can see on their website, they created a union of 15 Chardali Batei Din. They did not get a lot of publicity and around the era of corona it petered out. But it was reestablished under a new name in 2021 and is alive and kicking ever since. The headquarters is the Kollel for Dayanut in Yeshivat Heichal Eliyahu in Kochav Yaakov (or Psagot down the road). The founders are Rav Nir Aviv, who is the Rosh Kollel at Yeshiva Heichal Eliyahu, along with Rav Yitzchak Zaga, Rav Baruch Paz and Rav Ariel BarEli.

If you know Hebrew, you can see a promotional video about their network HERE.

I checked out the website and immediately noticed that it is all only in Hebrew. There is no parallel website in English, Russian, French or any other language. It looks as though they are only looking to serve their constituents. Other than that, they have all their material, i.e., documents and procedures for opening a case, Shtar Borerut, Tofes Tviah, Ktav Haganah, appeals, wills, Hetter Iska, Pruzbuls, even contracts for real estate purchases and rentals, available for download on their new improved website. Plus, they have a few docs with vital information (educational material) to help the "consumers" to navigate the system.

This is precisely what I am after. There is still something missing, but I will get to it later. (I do not mean the rating system.)

I contacted them for more information. I had a lengthy and productive conversation with one of the office secretaries, Geveret Y. B. She was friendly, knowledgeable and helpful. She told me that the main motives for setting this up was to make Beis Din as transparent and orderly as the secular courts and to offer a court of appeals. Another thing was to ensure that a court case can be resolved in a reasonable time frame. They aim to reach a ruling within three months. 

These things are deficient in the independent Batei Din for Mammonos and this lack is what holds back religious Jews from wanting to go to the Batei Din instead of the courts. They want to make Beis Din every religious Jew’s priority.

I asked her why the leading Chardali Beis Din in Yerushalayim, Eretz Chemda, is not part of their network. She responded that all the associated Batei Din need to conform with the standards and protocols of the Irgun. Eretz Chemda, which is a force in itself, did not want to subjugate their independence to an umbrella organization. They still have a good working relationship.

I also had a brief conversation with Rav Nir Aviv, the founder. I asked how many Batei Din they have now, and the answer is close to 30. 

I asked him why all of their information is in Hebrew and they do not have any accommodations for folks who don’t have Hebrew as their first language. He said he hopes to be able to expand in languages eventually. Most of his chevra know nothing but Hebrew.

I asked if he tried to recruit any black-hat charedi Batei Din to his network. He said that he hasn’t made moves in that direction, but he would be more than happy if they want to join up. He did add that it is not uncommon for us black-hat chareidim to make use of his Batei Din. Aside from the features of an appeals court, there is much more neutrality if they go there since, in the chareidi Batei Din, everybody knows or is related to somebody.

I asked him if he knows my brother-in-law’s brother who happens to be the Rav of Kochav Yaakov. He does. 

Lastly, I asked him about the “missing something” that I mentioned several paragraphs back. He said that this would be opening a Pandora’s box, but he is willing to listen to what I had in mind.

In any case, in my opinion, this organization is truly L’Chatchila. As I said, it comprises most of what I want to see in this regulatory body. I am excited about it and sincerely wish it growing success. We really need it. 

When I say,” We really need it”, I mean the royal “We”. We need this in the black-hat chareidi world. In my opinion, their system is real L’Chatchila and ours is Bediavad. I would be very happy to see a list of black-hat chareidi Batei Din joining their network, maybe as a separate lineup. If not that, then to establish a network of our own.

This is what Project Emesh is all about.

And now, just what is this mystery missing element that I want to see adopted by all Batei Din? The one that would be opening a Pandora’s box?

It is a more comprehensive and user-friendly Shtar Borrerut (Arbitration agreement).

Most people who have never been to Beis Din have no clue what a Shtar Borrerut is, why it is necessary, why it is so important, and why it is so dangerous. They didn’t learn anything about it in Sanhedrin or Bava Metziah. They did not exist in the old days.

How, why, and when did these turn up? What’s wrong with them, and how can we fix them?

This is the main subject of my upcoming posts.

Stay tuned for the Pandora’s box.