Our stroller is too heavy,” Mrs. Reich said to her husband. “I’d like to replace it with a lighter one.”

“What should we do with the old one?” Mr. Reich asked. “It’s still in good condition.”

“We could give it away,” suggested Mrs. Reich. “When we get the new one, post a sign in shul.”

Later that week Mrs. Reich bought a new, lighter stroller and gave her husband a sign to post: “Heavy stroller in good condition available for taking. Please contact the Reichs.”

A few days later, a family called to inquire about the stroller.

“We’re happy to give it to you,” said Mrs. Reich. “It’s sitting in our basement.”

“We really appreciate it,” they said. “Can we come by next week and pick it up?”

“That’s fine,” said Mrs. Reich.

On Thursday afternoon Mrs. Reich went out to the park with the new stroller. While she was pushing the baby on the swing, someone took the stroller and walked off.

When Mr. Reich returned from work that evening, his wife related what happened. “What should we do now?” she asked. “We can’t afford to buy a third stroller.”

“We’ll have to keep the old one,” said Mr. Reich. “There’s nothing else to do.”

“But I already told the other family that we’d give it to them,” said Mrs. Reich. “It’s not nice to back out on them.”

“They’ll understand,” said Mr. Reich. “We only offered the old stroller because we didn’t need it, but now we need it. It’s not like they paid us anything or we signed any agreement. We simply committed verbally, but circumstances changed and we’re not in a position to give it away anymore.”

“I don’t feel comfortable about doing that without asking Rabbi Dayan,” said Mrs. Reich.

Mr. Reich called Rabbi Dayan. “We offered our old stroller to a family last week, but our new one was stolen and we now need the old one,” he said. “Can we retract our offer and keep it?”

“That depends on whom you offered the stroller to,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “A transaction usually needs a formal act of acquisition (kinyan) to be legally binding,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “For example, picking up the stroller or pushing it in the recipient’s property. Nonetheless, a person is still expected to honor his word. Moreover, one who does not uphold his verbal commitments is considered untrustworthy (mechusar amana), since the recipient relied on his word” (C.M. 204:11).

“It’s not as if I’m simply backing out,” objected Mr. Reich. “There was a change in circumstances; our new stroller was stolen.”

“The Rema addresses this point,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “Indeed, the consensus of later authorities is that a significant change in circumstances, such as this, is reasonable cause for a person to retract from his verbal commitment” (Chasam Sofer, C.M. 102; Pischei Choshen, Kinyanim 1:[5]).

“Then what difference does it make whom the recipient is?” asked Mr. Reich.

“The Gemara (R.H. 6a) teaches that a pledge to charity is tantamount to a vow,” explained Rabbi Dayan. “Thus, if the recipient was a needy family, the offer is not merely a verbal commitment, but rather a vow to charity! You may not retract from a vow, even if circumstances changed afterwards” (Y.D. 258:12; C.M. 125:5).

“Is there any way to undo the vow?” asked Mr. Reich.

“It is sometimes possible through hataras nedarim (nullification of vows), although it’s not simple for charity vows,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “Furthermore, Harav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, zt”l, indicates that when a person annuls before Rosh Hashanah any vows that he will make during the year, as is customary, a verbal commitment such as this — which was not intended to be a vow — would not take the status of a vow. Thus, if the recipient family was needy, the issue requires further clarification” (Y.D. 258:6; Halichos Shlomo, Moadim vol. I, Shalmei Neder [18]).