Civil Case (Tel Aviv) 848-06-23 Yaffa Feldman v. Fresh Concept – Strategies for Original Thinking Ltd.

Prior to a lawsuit in which the plaintiff petitions to order the cancellation of a loan agreement signed between the plaintiff (together with other borrowers) and the defendant dated April 23, 2017, as well as later appendices that were signed later after this agreement, as well as to order the cancellation of mortgage deeds signed by the plaintiff on April 23, 2017 and May 15, 2019, in accordance with which a mortgage was registered in favor of the defendant regarding the plaintiff's rights in an apartment at 5 HaRav Dessler Street, Bnei Brak, known as Subplot 21 in Plot 241 in Block 6188 (hereinafter: the "Apartment").

Introduction;

1. The plaintiff - Yaffa Feldman (hereinafter: "the plaintiff"), is married to Mr. Yehezkel Feldman (hereinafter: "Feldman"), the couple has seven children. The couple, as well as four of their children - including a child with a nursing minor - live in the apartment.
2. Feldman is a sole shareholder of Builders and Protected Tax Appeals Company 514724425 (hereinafter: "Builders and Protected Company") (the registration of this company was attached as page 38 to the statement of claim).
3. The defendant - Fresh Concept - Strategies for Original Thinking in Tax Appeals (hereinafter: "the Defendant" or "Fresh"), is a company whose part of its business is the provision of non-bank loans.
4. On April 23, 2017, a loan agreement was signed between the plaintiff, Feldman and Bonim and Protected as Borrowers and the defendant as a lender - a loan agreement, in accordance with the terms of which the defendant lent the borrowers the sum of ILS 2,500,000 (hereinafter: the "Loan Agreement") (the loan agreement was attached as Appendix A to the statement of claim). I will note that the plaintiff claims that although she was defined in the preamble to this agreement as a "borrower", in practice her status in this agreement is as a guarantor and not as a borrower.  At the same time, I will note that in the title of the agreement, Farsh appears as the lender, while Feldman, the Builders and Protected Company and the plaintiff appear as the three of them: "All together and separately and each alone in a mutual guarantee hereinafter: "the borrower".  I will also note that at the bottom of each page of the loan agreement are signatures and the plaintiff's signature appears above the inscription: "Borrower 2".
5. In light of their importance, I will note that among the terms of the loan, it was stipulated - in clause 6 of the first loan agreement - that the loan payments would be paid on time and in the following manner:
6. The sum of ILS 865,000 was paid by check to the Mortgage Bank Leumi Mortgage Ordinance in a tax appeal, for the repayment of a mortgage for which the balance of the settlement amounted to this sum and for which a mortgage was registered on the rights in the apartment in favor of Bank Leumi (hereinafter: the "Mortgage to Bank Leumi"). According to the registration text that was attached to the statement of defense (see page 20 of the statement of defense) - the amount of the mortgage registered with Bank Leumi was ILS 2,000,000.  However, as stated, on the relevant dates, the balance of the mortgage settlement was ILS 865,000 and there is no dispute between the parties that this sum was paid out of the loan money given by the defendant and that in light of this payment, the mortgage was indeed cleared and its registration was deleted from the land registry.
7. It was determined that the sum of ILS 200,000 would be paid back to the lender after the borrowers received the checks required for the repayment of the loan, registration of the mortgage in favor of the defendant, receipt of owners' declarations and registration of a pledge on the borrower's rights in the apartments, including the lien on the rent from apartment number 5.

• The Ottoman Settlement [Old Version] 1916 The sum of ILS 935,000 will be paid to the individual borrower 3 - the Builders and Protected Company - i.e., Feldman, after fulfilling the conditions specified in Collective Dispute B.

1. 12-34-56-78 Chekhov v. State of Israel, P.D.  51 (2)The balance of the loan in the amount of ILS 500,000 will be paid within 30 days from the date of payment specified in the collective dispute C to the individual borrower 3 - the Builders and Protected Company - i.e., to Feldman.
2. Sections 7 and 8 stipulate that the loan period is for one year and that the borrower has the option to extend it for an additional year.
3. Clause 12 of the loan agreement stipulates that the loan is not linked, while clause 13 of the agreement stipulates that the interest on the loan will be 14% of the loan amount plus tax appeals, i.e., at a total of 1.167% per month plus VAT. It was determined that the interest would be paid from the date of signing the contract on the full amount of the loan.  However, it was agreed that the interest in respect of the sum of ILS 500,000 would be paid only after 30 business days from the date of signing the agreement.  According to section 15, the borrower undertook to pay the lender the interest on each month.  In addition, provisions relating to the payment of arrears interest were established in sections 19-27.  I will note that in sections 26 and 27 it was determined that:

"26.  The borrower confirms that he has understood that in view of the amount of the loan, and as stated in section 15 of the Non-Bank Loans Law, the interest amounts specified in sections 5 and 6 of this law will not apply, with the lender relying on this for the mortgage of the loan.  Notwithstanding the aforesaid, it is agreed that if a judicial authority rules that these sections apply, the maximum interest permitted under this law will apply.

27. The borrower confirms that since the loan is not linked, the interest order (Maximum Interest Rate Interest), 5730-1970 will not apply to it.
28. In the framework of clause 18 of the loan agreement, the borrower agreed to pay a participation fee for drafting the agreement to the lender in the sum of ILS 50,000 plus VAT.
29. In clause 66 of the loan agreement, under the heading "Transaction Permit", it is written:

"All the details of the aforementioned loan and the details of the payments for any amount that the aforementioned investor will receive will be only in accordance with the heter of the transaction according to the heter of the Maharam and according to the improvement of the wisdom of Adam and the poskim after him, and the sum will be 16% of the amount he will invest and 1% will be the fee of the person engaged in the aforementioned transaction for his work, and the amount of the compromise is the sum of the aforementioned 15% on the entire amount of the aforementioned and after deducting the transaction's fees to the recipient of the transaction.  The above and the rest of the amount of the compromise as mentioned above, and all in the most beneficial manner according to the Talmud, and everything is strong and valid.  It is clarified for the purpose of this clause that this clause was added to the agreement at the request of the borrower for halachic reasons only and not for commercial reasons, and the provisions of this clause do not bite or damage or diminish or harm or reduce the borrower's obligations to the borrower.  In any case of contradiction between the provisions of this section and any of the clauses of the Agreement and/or the documents of this Agreement and/or its appendices, the provisions of the other clauses of the Agreement and/or its documents and/or appendices shall apply." [I will note that the deletion exists in the original agreement and it was made in handwriting with the defendant's signature and seal next to it].

10. Copied from NevoI will note that on the last page of the loan agreement there is a confirmation as follows:

"I'm the undersigned, Adv. Yona Z.  Winder M.R.  23438 confirms that on April 23, 2017, they appeared before all the borrowers, and after I explained to them the nature of the transaction and the significance of their signature, they signed this agreement to me of their own free will."