Question:

I wish to sell a property (real estate) to someone in installments spread over 3 years:

1-At what point does the property change ownership?

2-What should we do if either of us does not complete the transaction (for example he does not complete payments, or I die before transferring title to him, etc...)?

Answer:

بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمنِ الرَّحِيْم

In the Name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful.

1) Selling something in installments is a type of credit sale (sale on deferred payment basis). Both cash sale (sale on immediate payment basis) as well as credit sale are permissible in Shariah.

When one of the two parties (buyer and seller) makes an offer and the other accepts it, the transaction becomes valid and binding, for example the seller says, "I have sold this item to you for $1000" and the buyer says, “I accept”. Once the transaction becomes valid and binding, the buyer becomes the owner of the merchandise and the amount they both agreed on (the price) becomes payable to the seller. Furthermore, it becomes compulsory on the seller to hand over the merchandise, just as it becomes compulsory on the buyer make the payment immediately (in the case of cash sale) or on the specified date (in the case of credit sale).[1]

 

In a cash sale, the seller has the right to withhold the merchandise until he receives the payment from the buyer. However, in a credit sale, the seller does NOT have the right to withhold the merchandise. Yes, if part of the payment was agreed to be paid immediately and the rest to be paid at a later date, then the seller may withhold the merchandise until he receives from the buyer the portion of the payment that was to be paid immediately.[2]

 

If the two parties wish to enter into a transaction with installment payments, they must specify the payment periods and amount for the installments, for example: ten weekly installments of $100 each.

 

 

2)  Once both of you contract the transaction, you should transfer the title to his name as soon as possible to avoid any legal issues and disputes later on. However, as mentioned above, according to Shariah, he will become the owner of the property as soon as both of you contract the transaction by engaging in offer and acceptance, regardless of whether the property title was transferred to his name.

If you fear that he may not be able to complete the payment, then our suggestion is that at the time of the transaction you should stipulate that he gives you the property (that you wish to sell to him) as collateral for the payment.[3] To do this, he will first have to take possession of the property (after buying it) then give it to you as collateral.[4] You should also stipulate that he authorises you to sell the property on his behalf to recover the payment due to you if he fails to make the payment by the due date (three years, as you mentioned). He cannot withdraw this authorization thereafter.[5] If you sell the collateral because of his non-payment by the due date, you will keep the amount that was due to you but must give any surplus amount to him.

Once you have taken the property as collateral, you may, if you wish, allow him to stay in it. It will be considered as you lending the property to him. However, you will still have the right to ask him to give it back to you whenever you want. Hence, if, for example, he fails to pay an installment, you may ask him to give the property back to you, which you will then hold as collateral.[6]

Note that it will be forbidden for you to benefit from the collateral in any way, including by living in it.[7]

If he dies without paying you your due, you will recover your due from the sale of the collateral. Once you recover your due, the remaining money (if any) will be given to his inheritors and other creditors.[8]

Liability for the collateral getting destroyed:

·          Once the collateral is in your possession, if it gets destroyed without any act of transgression on your part, you will be liable for the lesser of these two amounts: the market value of the collateral and the amount the buyer owes you. If, therefore, the market value of the collateral is the same as the amount the buyer owes you, it will be considered that he paid you your due. If the market value of the collateral is less than the amount the buyer owes you, he has to pay you the difference. If the market value of the collateral is more than the amount the buyer owes you, then it will be considered that he paid you your due and you will not have to pay him the excess amount.

·          If, on the other hand, the collateral gets destroyed due to an act of transgression on your part, then you will be liable for the market value of the collateral.

·          If the buyer borrows the collateral from you and it gets destroyed in his possession, he will be liable for the loss. He must pay you the full amount that he owes you.[9]

 

And Allah Ta'ala knows best.

Mufti Faizal Riza
30/11/2021

Darul Ifta Australia
www.fatwa.org.au

 

---

[1] (قوله: وحكمه ثبوت الملك) أي في البدلين لكل منهما في بدل، وهذا حكمه الأصلي، والتابع وجوب تسليم المبيع والثمن ( رد المحتار: كتاب البيوع 4/ 506 ط سعيد) ومثله في شرح المجلة للأتاسي: 2/373

 

[2] قال أصحابنا رحمهم الله تعالى للبائع حق حبس المبيع لاستيفاء الثمن إذا كان حالا كذا في المحيط وإن كان مؤجلا فليس للبائع أن يحبس المبيع قبل حلول الأجل ولا بعده كذا في المبسوط ولو كان بعض الثمن حالا وبعضه مؤجلا فله حبسه حتى يستوفي الحال ولو بقي من الثمن شيء قليل كان له حبس جميع المبيع كذا في الذخيرة [الفتاوى الهندية 3/  16 ط العلمية] و كذا في فقه البيوع للمفتي تقي العثماني: 1/539

 

[3] وكذا البيع بشرط أن يعطي المشتري بالثمن رهنا والرهن معلوم بالإشارة أو التسمية جاز البيع استحسانا وإن لم يكن الرهن من مقتضيات العقد إلا أن الرهن يؤكد موجب العقد [الفتاوى الهندية 3/ 142]

فأما كونه مملوكا للراهن فليس بشرط لجواز الرهن إلخ [الفتاوى الهندية 5/ 516]

وانظر: قضايا فقهية معاصرة: 1/12-14

If a collateral was stipulated at the time of the transaction and he later refuses to give it to you, then he will be given a choice to either pay the amount he owes you (payment for the property you sold him) or give you the market value of the collateral (which you will then hold as collateral). His failure to pay you either of these will enable you to cancel the transaction (in which case you will have to return to him any payment, such as deposit, that he may have made).

ولو شرط فيه رهنا معينا ثم امتنع من تسليم الرهن لم يجبر عليه ولكن يقال للمشتري إما أن تدفع الرهن أو قيمته أو الثمن أو يفسخ العقد كذا في محيط السرخسي ولو امتنع المشتري من هذه الوجوه فللبائع أن يفسخ البيع هكذا في البدائع. [الفتاوى الهندية 3/ 143]

 

[4] نعم يجوز أن يقبضه المشتري أولا ثم يرهنه لدي البائع توثيقا للدين (فقه البيوع للمفتي تقي العثماني: 1/540) وكذا في رد المحتار 6/497 ط سعيد

 

[5] وإذا وكل الراهن المرتهن أو العدل أو غيرهما ببيع الرهن عند حلول الدين فالوكالة جائزة؛ لأنه توكيل ببيع ماله ،وإن شرطت في عقد الرهن فليس للراهن أن يعزل الوكيل، وإن عزله لم ينعزل؛ لأنها لما شرطت في ضمن عقد الرهن صار وصفا من أوصافه وحقا من حقوقه؛ ألا ترى أنه لزيادة الوثيقة فيلزم بلزوم أصله، ولأنه تعلق به حق المرتهن وفي العزل إتواء حقه وصار كالوكيل بالخصومة بطلب المدعي [الهداية: 4/ 538]

 

[6] وإذا أعار المرتهن الرهن للراهن ليخدمه أو ليعمل له عملا فقبضه خرج من ضمان المرتهن" لمنافاة بين يد العارية ويد الرهن "فإن هلك في يد الراهن هلك بغير شيء" لفوات القبض المضمون "وللمرتهن أن يسترجعه إلى يده"؛ لأن عقد الرهن باق إلا في حكم الضمان في الحال. ألا ترى أنه لو هلك الراهن قبل أن يرده على المرتهن كان المرتهن أحق به من سائر الغرماء، وهذا؛ لأن يد العارية ليست بلازمة والضمان ليس من لوازم الرهن على كل حال ( الهداية: 4/546)

 

[7] إمداد الفتاوى: 3/454
 وانظر: رد المحتار: 10/87 ط دار المعرفة

 

[8] أما حكمه فملك العين المرهونة في حق الحبس حتى يكون أحق بإمساكه إلى وقت إيفاء الدين فإذا مات الراهن فهو أحق به من سائر الغرماء فيستوفى منه دينه فما فضل يكون لسائر الغرماء والورثة، ولو مات وأفلس، وعليه ديون يكون المرتهن أخص به من سائر الغرماء كذا في محيط السرخسي [الفتاوى الهندية 5/ 518]

 

[9] وهو مضمون بالأقل من قيمته ومن الدين، فإذا هلك في يد المرتهن، وقيمته والدين سواء صار المرتهن مستوفيا لدينه، وإن كانت قيمة الرهن أكثر فالفضل أمانة في يده"؛ لأن المضمون بقدر ما يقع به الاستيفاء وذاك بقدر الدين "وإن كانت أقل سقط من الدين بقدره ورجع المرتهن بالفضل"؛ لأن الاستيفاء بقدر المالية [ الهداية 4/  519 ط قديمي ]

إذا هلك المرهون في يد المرتهن أو في يد العدل ينظر إلى قيمته يوم القبض، وإلى الدين، فإن كانت قيمته مثل الدين سقط الدين بهلاكه، وإن كانت قيمته أكثر من الدين سقط الدين وهو في الفضل أمين، وإن كانت قيمته أقل من الدين سقط من الدين قدر قيمة الرهن ويرجع المرتهن على الراهن بفضل الدين كذا في الذخيرة [الفتاوى الهندية 5/ 530]

تنبيه: حصل سبق القلم في قضايا فقهية معاصرة 1/12 حيث قال: "أما في الرهن لو هلك عند البائع بغير تعدٍّ منه لا ينفسخ البيع بل يهلك من مال المشتري ولا يسقط الثمن"اهــــ. فإنه مخالف لما في الهداية والهندية وغيرهما، اللهم إلا أن يكون مبنيا على قول غير الحنفية، انظر: قاموس الفقه لمولانا خالد سيف الله الرحماني: 3/506

 

---

DISCLAIMER: 
Darul Ifta Australia answers questions  pertaining to Shariah. Thereafter, some of these questions and answers are placed for public view on www.fatwa.org.au for educational purposes. However, many of these answers are unique to a particular scenario and cannot be taken as a basis to establish a ruling in another situation or another environment. Darul Ifta Australia bears no responsibility with regards to these questions being used out of their intended context.

• The Shariah ruling herein given is based specifically on the question posed and should be read in conjunction with the question.
• Darul Ifta Australia bears no responsibility to any party who may or may not act on this answer and is being hereby exempted from loss or damage howsoever caused.
• This answer may not be used as evidence in any Court of Law without prior written consent of Darul Ifta Australia.
• Any or all links provided in our emails, answers and articles are restricted to the specific material being cited. Such referencing should not be taken as an endorsement of other contents of that website.