about some transactions in a company in the form of installments?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : We have brothers in Shaykh Husayn’s house who say that when they bought a pickup truck, it naturally had bills of exchange with the company. The owners who had bought it paid off about one or two bills of exchange of its value. Now they say, “We want to take it and pay the bills of exchange; we will pay the rest.”
The Shaykh : It is not permissible, just as if they had bought it directly from the company.
The questioner : I told him that these bills of exchange carry interest, as far as I know and as far as my knowledge goes. They said, “We want to go to the market to find out its price, and we will proceed based on that price. For example, they said its price is four thousand dinars now, and it has bills of exchange for four thousand dinars. It is permissible to pay off the bills of exchange and take the vehicle based on the same amount, without interest.”
The Shaykh : It is not permissible.
Another questioner: We asked the Shaykh the same question on that day. The Shaykh said, “If they pay the company in cash to complete all the bills of exchange—say, they owe three thousand, for example—and we pay them in cash from our side, we say, ‘We want you to give us two thousand and eight hundred dirhams to pay them off…’ to settle the company’s claim.”
Another questioner: I know if it is cash, but the matter is that we did not increase it.
The Shaykh : It was the one who bought it who increased it.
The questioner : The one who bought it increased it, but I bought it at its value, meaning at its value as if I had paid cash. I mean, I went to a person who buys and sells cars and said to him, “Uncle, what is the price of this pickup truck?” He said to me, for example, four thousand dinars. Now, in cash, its price is four thousand dinars, and the company has four thousand dinars due from the owner of the pickup truck. Is it permissible for me to take it and pay the monthly bills of exchange in installments?
The Shaykh : Well, is it reasonable to say that it is commercial that the market price is the price of the bills of exchange? Is that reasonable?The questioner : The amount remaining on it; he increased it in the company.The Shaykh : I asked you: are the scenarios you are presenting now reasonable in terms of commercial reality? I mean, a car goes to the market and its price is the price of the bills of exchange, knowing that the bills of exchange include the cash price plus the installment price.
The questioner : Yes, but he has paid part of its value in money.
The Shaykh : No problem, my dear, whether he has paid a quarter, a third, half, three-quarters, or four-quarters, it does not matter. The important thing is that in your view, we are buying at the market price. This is not reasonable. The market price will be lower than the price of the bills of exchange that the man owes.
The questioner : No, because it just happened to be approximately the same thing.The Shaykh : Look, the scenario with you has conceded a bit; you said “approximately.” Before, the claim was that it was four thousand, its price in the market, and he owed four thousand. This is not reasonable from a commercial standpoint.
The Shaykh : It is not permissible, just as if they had bought it directly from the company.
The questioner : I told him that these bills of exchange carry interest, as far as I know and as far as my knowledge goes. They said, “We want to go to the market to find out its price, and we will proceed based on that price. For example, they said its price is four thousand dinars now, and it has bills of exchange for four thousand dinars. It is permissible to pay off the bills of exchange and take the vehicle based on the same amount, without interest.”
The Shaykh : It is not permissible.
Another questioner: We asked the Shaykh the same question on that day. The Shaykh said, “If they pay the company in cash to complete all the bills of exchange—say, they owe three thousand, for example—and we pay them in cash from our side, we say, ‘We want you to give us two thousand and eight hundred dirhams to pay them off…’ to settle the company’s claim.”
Another questioner: I know if it is cash, but the matter is that we did not increase it.
The Shaykh : It was the one who bought it who increased it.
The questioner : The one who bought it increased it, but I bought it at its value, meaning at its value as if I had paid cash. I mean, I went to a person who buys and sells cars and said to him, “Uncle, what is the price of this pickup truck?” He said to me, for example, four thousand dinars. Now, in cash, its price is four thousand dinars, and the company has four thousand dinars due from the owner of the pickup truck. Is it permissible for me to take it and pay the monthly bills of exchange in installments?
The Shaykh : Well, is it reasonable to say that it is commercial that the market price is the price of the bills of exchange? Is that reasonable?The questioner : The amount remaining on it; he increased it in the company.The Shaykh : I asked you: are the scenarios you are presenting now reasonable in terms of commercial reality? I mean, a car goes to the market and its price is the price of the bills of exchange, knowing that the bills of exchange include the cash price plus the installment price.
The questioner : Yes, but he has paid part of its value in money.
The Shaykh : No problem, my dear, whether he has paid a quarter, a third, half, three-quarters, or four-quarters, it does not matter. The important thing is that in your view, we are buying at the market price. This is not reasonable. The market price will be lower than the price of the bills of exchange that the man owes.
The questioner : No, because it just happened to be approximately the same thing.The Shaykh : Look, the scenario with you has conceded a bit; you said “approximately.” Before, the claim was that it was four thousand, its price in the market, and he owed four thousand. This is not reasonable from a commercial standpoint.