Feldman also testified on page 123 that when he took out the loan, he did not think about the possibility that he would not repay the loan and that "the house would be taken away from him."
Kerry from Feldman's testimony indicates that in real time, he invested the money in businesses, which he believed would succeed, but only due to force majeure related to a health condition he was not on the ground and his contractor was operating malfunctioning - and therefore the business collapsed.
- From the aforesaid, it appears that in my approach, the plaintiff understood the nature of the loan as well as the risks involved in it, but she relied on her husband that these risks would not materialize. In light of this, and in accordance with the Supreme Court's ruling in the Martin case (as cited in paragraph 85 above of the judgment) - in any event, the plaintiff cannot be heard in her argument that her signature should not be validated.
- Without derogating from the aforesaid , I am of the opinion that in any event, in the circumstances at hand, the defendant could have relied on the confirmation of the attorneys who verified the plaintiff's signature and also confirmed that they explained the nature of the transaction to her.
As to the defendant's possibility of relying on the approval of attorneys as aforesaid, as detailed in detail, the plaintiff initially claimed that the defendant could not rely on the attorneys' approvals and could not shirk her personal obligation to explain to the plaintiff the nature of the transaction that is the subject of the hearing. This argument of the plaintiff is inconsistent with the case law (as detailed above, in the case of Gilman, L. Kovitz and even Martin) - from which it emerges that - as a rule, a lender can rely on the approval of a lawyer according to which he explained to the borrower the nature of the transaction, as well as the risks arising from it, but this will not exempt the lender from his obligation to disclose material details - such as the amount of the debt. or the details listed in Section 3 of the Fair Credit Law - which are within the lender's knowledge.