In a very unusual manner, the plaintiffs note that they were left to watch from a distance when Mr. Shimoni and Mr. Dahari went to the Goren meeting place in order to hand over the money to him (see, for example, paragraph 12 of Mr. Zidon's affidavit and paragraph 7 of Mr. Moshe Horowitz's affidavit). The plaintiffs were not allowed to approach the seller, who moved the Goren hearing place, in order to hand over the money to him themselves. Mrs. Shimoni Cohen testified in this context, "This deal seemed really strange to me. I need you, only you can meet with the seller and it has to be in some alley... and bring cash. Everything seemed completely strange to me, but we were in a deal and everyone made the deal and that was the seller's condition..." (p. 1339 of Prov. S. 26 to p. 1340 S. 6). She also claimed, "The three of us, me, Elia and Dahari went out of the office and met behind some alley, it also seemed very strange to me. I was not allowed to meet with Goren" (ibid., p. 1350, paras. 12-15; See also: p. 1351, paras. 5-7; Ibid., p. 1352, paras. 5-13). Even when he moved the venue of the hearing, Ariel Cohen testified that "it seemed a little strange" (p. 438 , s. 17; See also: p. 315, paras. 18-19; p. 438 S. 10) that the seller refuses to meet the buyers. Moving the Goren Hearing Venue Cohen added that Mr. Shimoni approached Mr. Dahari in the direction of the Goren Hearing Place, which was standing at the end of the street, and that he saw the Goren Hearing Venue only from a distance and could not identify it (p. 332, 1-29).
This matter, therefore, aroused great wonder among the plaintiffs as to why they were not permitted to see the seller, talk to him and give him the money they paid themselves. However, since the plaintiffs wanted the transaction, as detailed above, they were not bothered about any of this matter. In fact, prior to the signing of the contracts, the plaintiffs were forbidden to know the details of the seller and the transfer of the Goren hearing place (see in this context paragraph 18 of Mr. Dahari's affidavit. In this context, Mr. Yaakov Horowitz testified that "he did not allow access to him" (p. 40 of Prov. S. 36; Ibid., p. 41 (15-23). A transaction in which the seller refuses to be identified, and the buyers are not entitled to receive his details and to speak with him, should have raised clear and obvious warning signs, since this is not the way of the world in normative transactions.