Q: Does rental grant the renter aspects of ownership?

A: Rental is the acquisition of usage rights in another’s property, whether real estate or movable, for compensation.

“Rental is a sale for that day” (B.M. 56b), but this does not mean that the renter acquires temporary ownership of the rented item. Thus, a Kohen may not feed terumah to an animal that he rented. Similarly, one may not rent a house to a gentile who will bring idols into it, since the Jewish owner will still violate the prohibition “lo savi to’eivah el beisecha” (Mishnah Terumos 11:9; Y.D. 151:1; see, however, Shach 151:17).

The Rishonim dispute whether rental acquires only the usage rights, or also rights in the item itself for its usage. Thus, if a person betroths a woman with a rented ring, some say that he has no rights in the item itself, while others maintain that it is considered his for this use (Rambam, Hil. Sechirus 7:1; She’eilah U’pikadon 1:5; Maharsham 7:205; E.H. 28:19).

Q: Is the rental fee due at the beginning or end of the rental period?
A: The Gemara (B.M. 65a, 110b) teaches that the rental fee is due only at the end of the usage, even though a kinyan is made at the beginning. Since the rental fee is for usage, it is due only after usage has been completed, unlike payment for a purchase, where the transfer of ownership takes place immediately with the kinyan (C.M. 126:18; Sma 317:2; Avnei Nezer, C.M. #25).
Included in rental is hiring an employee; the employer acquires the labor (usage) of the employee. Thus, wages are due at the end of the period (see Y.D. 176:6).
Nonetheless, as with other monetary law, the common rental practice is binding if not stipulated otherwise (Rema 331:1). Thus the common practice for real estate rental is to pay at the beginning of each month, not at the end. On the other hand, workers continue to be paid at the end of the month.

Q: What makes a rental agreement binding?

A: A rental agreement, like a purchase, requires a kinyan (act of acquisition) to make it binding. In general, the same forms of kinyan that apply to purchases apply to rentals, with some differences (C.M. 190:1; 195:9; 331:1; 307:2).

One form of kinyan for real estate is kesef, money. Thus, a person who gives money to confirm a real-estate rental makes the agreement binding. The Acharonim dispute whether money given as a non-refundable deposit, as commonly practiced, is meant to confirm the agreement as binding or only as a fine if the renter retracts (Pischei Teshuvah, C.M. 207:13; Beis Shlomo, Y.D. 187).

Similarly, there are disputes whether monetary payments other than cash are included in kinyan kesef: a personal check or loan obligation issued by the renter (Machaneh Ephraim, Kinyan Maos #5; Ketzos 190:1, 39:8); a check from a third party or made out to “cash” (Shach and Ketzos 190:1); and payment by credit or debit card (Chazan Ish, C.M. 3:17; Machaneh Ephraim, Shluchim #15; Ketzos 195:9).

Q: Does signing a rental contract or confirming via e-mail or the internet make a rental agreement binding?

A: Real estate is acquired through shtar, a contract that the seller hands to the buyer stating that he sells him the property. Similarly, a rental contract that the landlord hands to the renter for the purpose of finalizing the agreement would make it binding (C.M. 191:1, 3; 315:1).

Simply signing a rental contract, however, would not be included in shtar if it were not handed over. Nonetheless, it would likely be binding nowadays based on situmta, the common commercial practice (C.M. 201:1).

Similarly, any common commercial practice would make the agreement binding. The Rosh writes that a practice to finalize through speech alone, with no additional action, is not binding, whereas the Radbaz rules that even such a practice is binding (see Minchas Pitim 176:3). The current practice is that an e-mail or web confirmation is also binding.

Q: What other actions confirm real-estate rental? What about rental of movable items?

A: Bringing in furniture or unloading luggage is included in the kinyan of chazakah (taking possession) for rental. Although many maintain that usage cannot acquire ownership title, since rental is intended only for usage, it suffices to confirm rental (C.M. 192:11; Ketzos 189:1; Nesivos 192:6; Machaneh Ephraim, Sechirus #1).

Handing over the key is not considered a kinyan, even for rental, unless there is a common commercial practice to confirm in this manner (C.M. 192:2; 201:2; Sma 201:6).

Movable items are acquired for rental as with purchases, by picking them up or moving them. There is a dispute regarding a cash payment (C.M. 198:6; Pischei Teshuvah 198:8).

Many maintain that kinyan sudar confirms rental of both real estate and movable property. However, some maintain that sudar confirms only transfer of ownership, but not rental. Others maintain that it confirms rental of movable items, but not of real estate (C.M. 195:1, 9; Nesivos 195:4).

Q: I rented a summer home for the weekend without drafting a written contract. What are the terms of such a rental?

A: A confirmed rental is binding according to the terms stipulated, whether written or verbal. Terms that were not addressed are in accordance with the local common practice (minhag hamedinah) — (C.M. 315:2, 331:1; Sma 315:3).

However, for the rental agreement to be binding, the price must be either stipulated, known, left to the discretion of a third party, or agreed as the average going rate (C.M. 200:7, 331:3; Radbaz 6:2282).

If the renter used the rental item without an agreed price, he pays the going rate. If there is a price range, he pays only the lower end of the range and is not obligated to pay the average rate. However, the owner can refuse to allow him further use at this price, since the rental agreement is not binding without a defined price (as above) — (Maharashdam, C.M. #245; Ketzos 331:3; Pischei Choshen, Sechirus 5:[4], 8:4).

Q: My cousin owns an apartment in Eretz Yisrael that he often rents to visitors. When he heard that we were going there, he offered to let us stay in his apartment. We assumed he meant for free, but when we returned, he asked for rent. Must we pay?

A: Rema (C.M. 363:10) rules that if someone said to his friend, “Live in my property,” he is not liable for rent. However, he rules elsewhere (C.M. 246:17) that one who sustains his friend can charge him, unless the intention was clearly for free.

The Acharonim explain that a guest who typically stays with friends or relatives for free, and therefore did not benefit, is not liable when the owner offered usage without stipulating payment. However, one who typically rents or stays at a hotel, and therefore benefited from the lodging, is liable, unless beis din evaluates that the owner’s original intention was for free, depending on the circumstances and nature of the relationship (Shach 363:13; Ketzos 246:2; Pischei Choshen, Sechirus 8:34[70]).

Q: I rented a room at a certain price per month, without a specified time limit. Can the landlord raise the rent after three months?
A: When the rental agreement specifies a time frame, neither side can retract or unilaterally change the rent during the specified time, even if there is a significant, unexpected change in rental rates (C.M. 312:1, 10; 316:1).
If the rental agreement simply states the fee per day, month, week or year, without specifying a time, the price continues so long as the renter remains. However, either side can retract or demand to adjust the rental fee in order to continue the rental. (Real-estate rental often has a 30-day or one-year minimum, in accordance with local practice — C.M. 312:9; 341:1; Aruch Hashulchan 312:12.)
If there was a specified time frame and the renter continued residence without explicitly renewing the contract, there is a dispute whether the owner can retroactively charge the current, higher rate without having notified the renter beforehand (see Shach 312:10; Machaneh Ephraim, Sechirus #11).

Q: I rented a resort cottage for two weeks and the air conditioner is broken. Can I demand a different cottage or a reduction in price?

A: The owner is required to provide the cottage fit for use, in accordance with the stipulations or common expectations. In the summer the cottage is considered defective without an air conditioner and he is required to repair it (C. M. 232:6; 314:1; Nesivos 310:1).

Even if you continue to use the cottage, you do not forfeit the right to demand repair (unlike a defective purchase), since you expect the owner to repair it (C.M. 232:3; Sma 314:6).

When repair is not possible, if the rental specified this particular cottage, the owner is not required to provide an alternate one, but you have the right to withdraw from the rental. However, you cannot demand unilaterally to continue renting at a reduced price. If the rental did not specify this cottage, the owner is responsible to provide an alternate one (C.M. 232:4).

Q: Who is responsible for repairs to a rental unit?
A: This issue, as well, depends on the stipulated terms and the local practice of most people for such a dwelling (Rema 314:2; Aruch Hashulchan 314:1).
If the common practice is unclear, the guiding halachic principle is: Repairs that require professional service or that relate to the structure of the house for proper dwelling are the landlord’s responsibility; repairs that are not of a professional nature and relate to daily use are the tenant’s responsibility. 
For example, structural, electrical and plumbing issues necessary for proper maintenance of the house are the landlord’s responsibility; light fixtures, furniture and appliances are the tenant’s responsibility. If the tenant paid for repairs incumbent upon the landlord, he can deduct it from the rent (C.M. 314:1; Kesef Kodashim 314:1).
Affixing a mezuzah or roof railing, which are obligations upon the dweller, is also the tenant’s responsibility (C.M. 314:2; Y.D. 291:2. See Pischei Choshen, Sechirus 6:[6] regarding the railing of a porch intended for use).

Q: I rented a car for a month, but it became unusable. Is the owner obligated to provide an alternate car?
A: This depends on whether you rented a specific car (zeh) or merely a certain model or size (stam). If you rented a specific car (e.g., from a private person or by license plate number), the owner has no further responsibility to provide an alternate car; you pay for the time that you used it (C.M. 310:1-2; 312:17).
However, if you rented a model or size and the car provided becomes unusable, the owner is responsible to provide an alternate one, even out of pocket. According to some authorities, the rental itself obligates him in this way; some maintain the owner is responsible only if there was also a kinyan sudar or signed contract (situmta); others say it is only if the owner wants his payment. There are many details involved (see Pischei Choshen, Sechirus 3:5-7.)
Of course, this issue depends on the stipulated terms of the rental and the local practice (Rema 314:2).

Q: I rented a residential unit, but would like to use it for a workshop or office. Do I need the owner’s permission?
A: A renter should use the rental unit for the intended purpose and return it in the same condition in which he received it. He may not use the property for an alternate purpose that might damage it beyond the normal, expected wear and tear (C.M. 320:4).
If the tenant will repair any damage and restore the property to its original state, it seems permissible to use it for a different purpose, but the landlord can refuse if he fears this will require litigation. Similarly, the tenant is not allowed to use the property for an alternate purpose or leave it derelict if this will reduce future rental value (Kesef Kodashim 316:1; Maharsham 2:198).
The tenant may not make structural changes to the property without the landlord’s consent, unless the local custom allows making changes and restoring the property at the end of the rental period (Maharashdam, C.M. #292; Rema 314:2).

(Adapted by Rabbi Meir Orlian from the writings of Harav Chaim Kohn, shlita)
Q: I installed an air conditioner and constructed a built-in, custom bookcase in my rented apartment. Does the owner have to reimburse me when I leave?
A: The renter can make property improvements that are beneficial to the landlord as well. If the improvement was important, the renter can demand reimbursement of expenses, up to the amount it benefited the owner, even if the owner initially refused (C.M. 178:3; Nesivos 341:15, 264:6).
If the landlord would not have done the improvement because he lacks funds, he does not have to reimburse the renter, but the renter can deduct the relevant amount from the remaining rent.
However, if the improvement does not add to the rental value, so that the landlord would not have done the improvement, he is exempt from reimbursing. He can tell the renter: “Take what you installed” (C.M. 375:6-7; Imrei Yosher 2:200; Minchas Pittim and Shiurei Minchah 375:6-7).
Thus, the owner would have to reimburse for the air conditioner, but not for the bookcase, unless it increases the rent.

Q: Is it necessary to give notice before terminating a rental?
A: If the rental agreement does not specify a termination date, Chazal required the landlord and tenant to give notice before terminating the rental, so that the tenant should not find himself homeless and the landlord should not miss rent (unless the tenant provides an alternate tenant).
However, if the contract specifies an end date, Chazal did not require further notice of the conclusion of the rental. Each party is expected to make arrangements beforehand (C.M. 312:5–8).
Chazal stipulated notice terms of 30 days, half a year, one year or three years, depending on the nature of the property and the season. Contemporary poskim indicate that the required time varies with era, location and common practice. (Maharashdam, C.M. #286). The obligations of tenant and landlord may differ, depending on the supply-and-demand forces of rental. Most rental agreements nowadays require notice of a month or two; many also include automatic renewal clauses when notice is not given.

Q: I rented an apartment for a year, but continued living there afterward without renewing the lease. What are the respective responsibilities?

A: Many rental leases stipulate that the lease is renewed automatically at the termination date or carries on as a month-by-month lease, sometimes at a slightly increased cost. Whatever was stipulated is binding. Similarly, in some places the common practice is that the lease renews automatically with the same conditions (C.M. and Taz 312:14; Sma 312:20).

If there is no stipulation or common practice, some say that either party can terminate the rental henceforth at any point without giving notice, whereas others consider it now a rental without a time frame, which requires at least 30 days’ notice (Meiri, B.M. 101b; Aruch Hashulchan 312:24).

If one party stated his intent to extend the rental when the lease terminated and the other party was silent, and the tenant remained a short time, it is questionable whether the silence reflects tacit agreement to extend and now requires giving notice (Kesef Kodashim 312:8).

(Based on writings of Harav Chaim Kohn, shlita)

Q: I bought a house that is currently rented out. How does this impact the current tenant?

A: The tenant pays the rent to the new owner. If the renter prepaid a number of months’ rent to the original owner, he is not required to pay you again; you should collect it from the previous owner (C.M. 312:1, 13; Sma 312:22; Gra 312:7).One who buys, receives or inherits a rental property has the same responsibility to give the tenants notice as the original owner, since his rights are no greater than the former owner’s. If the lease was for a fixed time, you cannot evict the tenant during the term of the lease.

If the lease had no time frame and the landlord has an urgent need to sell, and the buyer refuses to buy unless the tenant leaves immediately, some say that the tenant can be told to leave without giving the required notice beforehand (Rav Akiva Eiger 312:13, citing Hagahos Maimonios, Sechirus 6:[7] and Radbaz 4:143).

Q: I am in the process of building a house. Can I make a binding rental agreement now for when the house is completed?

A: Although a person cannot sell something that does not yet exist (davar shelo ba la’olam), some maintain that one can rent something that does not yet exist. It is also possible to word the contract as a personal obligation on the landlord (hischayvus) to rent the house when it is built, which is certainly binding, rather than a rental contract for the house itself (C.M. 315:2, 60:6; Nesivos 315:1; Aruch Hashulchan 315:3-5).

Similarly, there is a dispute whether one can rent in a binding manner, through a lease or cash payment, a property that is currently rented out to another. Most authorities maintain that one can, since the landlord still owns the property and it will return to his full possession at the conclusion of the current rental. This is the common practice (Shach 312:3; Pischei Teshuvah  315:2; Avnei Nezer, C.M. #11; Chochmas Shlomo 312:1).

Q: We are going away for the holidays. Can we sublet our apartment?

A: Many leases specify whether subletting is permitted or not and with what limitations.

In the absence of an explicit clause or common practice to the contrary, the tenant can sublet, since he “owns” the usage for the duration of the rental. However, he may sublet only to the number of people allowed by the initial lease, not to a larger family or group of people, since extra people cause additional wear and tear. The third party must also be a decent, reliable person (C.M. 316:1; Aruch Hashulchan 316:2; see Kesef Kodashim 316:1).

When the tenant sublet at a higher price than the original rental, if he was allowed to sublet, the profit is his; if he was not allowed, the profit goes to the landlord (Rema 363:10).

One may not sublet movable items to a third party without permission of the owner, since they are easily stolen, and the owner might not trust the third party (C.M. 342:1).

Q: I arranged verbally with my landlord to terminate the lease early. I now want to retract and complete the rental, while he insists on terminating it as agreed. Is our verbal agreement binding?

A: As previously mentioned, rental agreements require an act of acquisition to be binding, since it is like acquiring temporary ownership of the property. Therefore, many maintain that a verbal agreement does not cancel the rental without a countering act of reacquisition by the landlord. Others disagree, since the landlord remains owner of the property.

Some distinguish that a verbal statement of the tenant does cancel his acquired rights, but a statement of the landlord relieves the tenant of his monetary obligation, if he wishes to leave (mechilah).

See From the BHI Hotline for further elaboration of these opinions.

If the lease stipulates that either party can terminate the rental through giving 30 days’ notice, the stipulation is valid, like any other stipulation between two parties (Sma 189:1, 315:2; Ketzos Hachoshen 316:3; Mishpat Shalom 189:[2]; Pischei Choshen, Sechirus 4:2[7]).

Q: If someone dies partway through a rental lease, what are the rights and liabilities of the heirs according to Halachah?

A: Since rental is considered a temporary “sale” to the tenant for use, the heirs inherit the right to use the property for the duration of the lease, payable from the estate. If the deceased left no estate, some maintain that the heirs are not required to pay rent out of pocket, similar to other debts of the deceased. Others maintain that the landlord can evict the heirs if they refuse to pay out of pocket (C.M. and Rav Akiva Eiger 341:3).

If the heirs are not interested in using the property, some rule that they can withdraw from the lease and discontinue paying rent from the estate even when there is no alternate tenant, due to the uncontrollable circumstances. Others disagree, since rental is like a temporary sale. Rema rules that the landlord does not have to return rent that the tenant prepaid during his lifetime (C.M. 334:1; Shach 334:2).

Q: I rented a car for the weekend, but was unable to return it on time due to a blizzard. Do I have to pay for the extra day?

A: This depends on the terms of the rental contract. In an informal rental, without an explicit clause, if the price was linked solely to time, the renter is liable for the extra day. The rental agreement was for the time he had the car, so that the reason for the delay is irrelevant and there is no claim of oness (circumstances beyond one’s control).

However, if the car was rented for a stated purpose and the price was fixed accordingly, if the oness was related to that purpose and the renter was not expected to know of the potential problem, he is not liable for the extra day. Thus, if the car was rented to drive to a certain place and unexpected weather there prevented returning on time, he is exempt from additional payment (C.M. 310:3; Pischei Choshen, Sechirus 2:22-25).

Q: I rented a van for the day to move some furniture. Because of police activity, the street where I parked was cordoned off the entire day. Must I pay the rental fee?

A: When the rental item is unusable due to external oness, Chazal established (B.M. 77a) that if the misfortune is attributed to the renter he must pay, whereas if it is attributed to the owner he loses the fee (C.M. 310:1).

Sma (301:2) explains that if the misfortune occurred en route during the use it is attributed to the renter, since the misfortune would not have occurred had the item remained home with the owner. Nesivos (310:2) explains that if the item itself was afflicted and rendered unusable or will never return, it is the misfortune of the owner; whereas if the item remains intact and will return, even though the renter was restrained from its use, it is considered the renter’s misfortune. Thus, according to both explanations you are liable (Pischei Choshen, Sechirus 3:3).

Q: I rented a property for a week-long vacation, but heavy rains and subsequent flooding required evacuation of the area. Am I liable for the rent?

A: A widespread event that affects most of the region is referred to as makkas medinah (countrywide plague). The renter is not required to pay the rent for the unusable property in such a situation; it cannot be considered his own misfortune due to the widespread nature of the event. If the property is still usable or fixable, though, even with difficulty, the renter must pay the rent (C.M. 321:1; Shach 334:3).

If the event occurred during the middle of the rental, the Rema rules that it automatically requires a reduction in the rental for the unused portion, even if the renter did not cancel the rental (Rema 312:17, 321:1).

However, something common that the renter could have foreseen is not considered makkas medinah. Additionally, if the renter prepaid, he is not always entitled to a refund (Machaneh Ephraim, Sechirus #5, 7; Pischei Choshen, Sechirus 6:10-13).

Q: I rented an apartment for the duration of Sukkos at a certain price. When it became clear to the landlord that I intended to remain through Simchas Torah, he asked for additional payment, claiming that Shemini Atzeres and Simchas Torah are not part of Sukkos. Must I add a sum?

A: Technically, Sukkos is seven days, whereas the eighth day (and ninth outside of Israel) is Shemini Atzeres. The Gemara (Rosh Hashanah 4b; Sukkos 48a) teaches that Shemini Atzeres is considered an independent festival in six respects.

However, in common parlance, Sukkos includes Shemini Atzeres. The Ran (Nedarim 49a, s.v. Yerushalmi) cites a dispute regarding one who disavows wine for the duration of Sukkos, whether we follow the Torah’s terminology that Shemini Azteres is independent, or the people’s common parlance. We rule that vows follow the people’s parlance, and Shemini Atzeres is included in the chag (Y.D. 220:20; Shach 220:34).

Monetary law also follows the people’s parlance, like vows (Rashba 4:161; C.M. 215:8). Thus, a contract for the duration of Sukkos includes Shemini Atzeres, unless specified otherwise.

Q: I’m tight on funds. How critical is timely payment of rent?

A:  There is a mitzvah to pay wages promptly and a prohibition against withholding or delaying timely payment of wages. The Sifra extends this prohibition to rental fees of other items. There is an opinion that the prohibition does not apply to property rental, but many authorities maintain that it applies also to real estate, especially a building that is merely attached to the ground (C.M., Gra and Ketzos 339:1; Ahavas Chessed 9:5).Therefore, a renter must be careful to pay his rent promptly. The same is true of one who rents or leases a car or other equipment.

However, the halachic obligation to pay wages and rent is only at the conclusion of each payment period (e.g., month). Thus, since nowadays real estate rent is usually due at the beginning of the period, the prohibition against delaying (bal talin) does not apply (Mishpatecha L’Yaakov 6:35:3a; Gam Ani Odcha #169). Nonetheless, one is obligated to honor any monetary commitment promptly if he is able to (C.M. 339:7-8).

Q: I hired a rocket to launch a satellite. Due to a freak accident, the rocket and satellite exploded after launch. Must I pay the launch fee?

A: If the agreement specified the cargo, but not the ship, the renter must pay, since the shipper can still uphold the agreement with another ship, whereas the renter cannot provide the specified cargo.A: The Gemara (B.M. 79a-b) discusses a parallel case: Someone hired a ship to transport cargo and the ship sank. The ruling depends on the details of the agreement.

Conversely, if the agreement specified the ship, but not the cargo, the shipper must refund any payment, since he cannot uphold the agreement, whereas the renter can provide other cargo.

If both were specified, whoever holds the money retains it, since neither can uphold the agreement.

If neither was specified, both can uphold the agreement with another ship and cargo; if neither is interested, they split the rental fee; if only one party provides an alternate, he has the upper hand (C.M. 311:5; Shach 311:2).

The same is true in our case, unless the contract specified otherwise.

Q: I rented a house with an enclosed yard. Does a lost item (without simanim) that falls in the yard belong to me or the landlord?

A:There is a dispute on this issue. The Rambam (Hil. Sechirus 6:5) maintains that the landlord acquires it, unless there is a practice otherwise, whereas Rashi (B.M. 102a) and the Rosh (Responsa 1:1) maintain that the tenant acquires it, since rental is tantamount to temporary ownership.

There is an apparent contradiction in the Shulchan Aruch, who rules like both the Rosh and the Rambam (C.M. 260:4, 313:3). Some differentiate between items that are expected to be found and those that are not. The Shach (313:1) rejects this distinction and sides with the Rambam. However, other Acharonim side with the Rosh, since this is included in usage of the yard (Ketzos Hachoshen and Pischei Teshuvah 313:1; see also Mishpatecha L’Yaakov #94).

On account of the dispute, whoever takes the item first may keep it. Even according to the Rambam, the tenant acquires the item if this is the common practice.