Later in the conversation, Goren argued, "There is no deal, and certainly not in land of this kind, in which there is no chance and risk" (ibid., p. 36, paras. 6-8), and that "the manager does not want to do anything by force, he could have done it by force, he could have said I am thawing, I am kicking you out... Formally, there's a manager's decision that says you can come to the farmer and tell him, listen, there's now... The manager will come to the farmer and tell him that there is a compromise, I, go home, you will receive compensation according to value, it doesn't matter..." (ibid., p. 37, s. 26 to p. 38, s. 7). Moving the venue of the hearing, Goren noted, therefore, to Mr. Zidon that it is possible that the Administrator will take the land back into his possession. It should be noted that not only does Mr. Sidon not express surprise when he hears the words of the relocation of the Goren hearing place, but as stated, he notes that he is aware of this and even "it is worth it for me to take the risk."
Moreover. Insofar as the plaintiffs claim that the existence of the lease contract, including clause 15, was concealed from them at the time of the signing of the contracts, then in the course of the conversation, which was recorded by Mr. Zidon (see his interrogation at p. 1236 of Prov. S. 7-10), but it was natural to assume that Mr. Zidon would express his displeasure with the transfer of the Goren hearing venue as to why he and the transfer of the meeting place did not inform the plaintiffs about this at the time of the signing of the contracts. The fact that he did not do so despite the long conversation between the parties also shows that the plaintiffs' late claim in the statement of claim does not fit reality.
However, Mr. Goren added, "I don't know what will happen in such a case, it didn't happen, as if it didn't happen once" (ibid., p. 38, paras. 20-21). However, since it was made clear to Mr. Zidon that the taking of the land back by the manager is a possibility that is likely to take shape, even if the likelihood of this is not high, and given that Mr. Zidon himself explicitly stated that he was aware of it, the choice of plaintiffs 3-7 not to insist on the cancellation of the transaction at that time against the background of alleged misrepresentations relating to the concealment of the existence of section 15, contradicts their claim in the statement of claim that if they had known about it at the time the contracts were signed, they would not have signed them.