Question:

Can a debtor combine several files against him for debts at the Bailiff's office, including ones for unpaid maintenance, so that it is easier for him to repay them ?

 

Answer:

In principle the Bailiff’s Law of 1967 allows a debtor to ask for files opened against him to be combined so that a co-ordinated plan for the repayment of all the debts can be made. However, some files – including maintenance ones and those that are non-monetary – cannot be joined. 

 

Question:

What happens when a debtor asks for files against him at the bailiff’s to be combined ?

Answer:

Firstly, until files have actually been combined, as a general rule proceedings against the debtor are not stopped or frozen just because he has applied for files to be combined. However, as an exception the Chief Bailiff can issue an order stopping or freezing proceedings against the debtor for up to 60 days. He can only do this if there are special reasons, all parties are given an opportunity to react and security is given.

Secondly, once a debtor has applied for files to be joined, the Chief Bailiff will issue an order preventing him from leaving the country. In exceptional cases, where the debtor makes a written application. he will not issue such an order or will cancel it if one already exists, according to conditions he lays down. Once an order combining the files has been made, even though the debt exists, if all the creditors agree, the Chief Bailiff must cancel the exit order. He also has discretion to cancel it if asked and special reasons exist.

Thirdly, after a debtor has asked for files to be joined, the Chief Bailiff can put a freezing order on his property, upon request or on his own intitiative. 

 

 

Question:

What can a father who has  defaulted on maintenance payments for his children and has just received a warning letter and application from the Bailiff's where his ex-wife opened a file against him – if he cannot pay the debt ?

Answer:

The warning letter gives  several courses of action open– he must choose one of them within 20 days. Where a debtor does not contest the debt but cannot pay it – or meet the repayment terms attached to the application – one of the options is to apply for permission to repay the debt on his own terms – and suggest them. However, where the debt is for unpaid maintenance for a spouse, a minor or a disabled child, or a parent – the debtor cannot ask for this. 

 

 

Question:

If an man  cannot meet the terms the family court set for me to repay a child  maintenance and his ex-wife has opened a file for recover  the debt at the Bailiff's, is there are chance of the Bailiff altering them because he cannot meet them ?

 

Answer:

Where repayment terms are set by a court judgment the Chief Bailiff has no authority to change them. The Bailiff”s Act does empower the Chief Bailiff to refer the parties back to court to request a change in the payments regarding maintenance set , or repayments for debts that have built up concerning unpaid maintenance, where special reasons exist.

 

 

Question:

How can a man cancel a freezing order put on his property at the bailiff's as part of proceedings his ex-wife opened there against him for non-payment of child maintenance ?

 

Answer:

One way is pay off the debt, if it is undisputed. Once this is done, the Chief Bailiff has to give instructions for the order to be cancelled. The freezing order will then be erased from the land register.

Another way is for the debtor to make a written , reasoned application for its cancellation to the Chief Bailiff. The other side will have a right to react within 7 days of receiving a copy of the application. The Chief Bailiff can invite both parties to a hearing but if no reaction is received from the other side he can cancel the order anyway.

A third option is to sit tight and wait three years. If the other side has not asked for the property to be sold during this period and no other action has been taken, the Chief Bailiff has discretion to cancel the order after giving both sides the opportunity to react. If he does cancel the order, the note about it will be erased from the land register.

 

 

Question:

Is a husband entitled to stop paying maintenance to his ex-wife, according to their divorce agreement which was a authorized in court, because she has not paid him money she is obliged to do so under it ?

 

Answer:

Regarding debts owed between spouses or ex-spouses to one another because of their marital connection , the right to play one debt off against the other exists, under the Contracts Act (General Part) of 1973 . This right is recognized as a defence for the non-payment of a debt under the Bailiff’s Act of 1967. It exists unless specifically taken away.

Tel Aviv Family Court stressed this when dealing with a dispute involving a ruling made by an arbitrator about a divorced couple’s mutual debts. A maintenance debt had built up because the man had refused to give his wife financial support whilst she still owed him money as part of the property settlement between them. The arbitrator held that the woman owed her ex-husband a sum greater than the unpaid maintenance and that she could play off the debts. However, she did not pay her debt and yet filed for the unpaid maintenance at the bailiff’s office. The Chief Bailiff held that the man could not force her to exercise her right to play off the debts. He appealed to the district court which held that in order to cancel the appellant’s right to play the debts off against each other, the arbitrator would have had to specifically deny him the right to do so. As he had not done this, the appellant was entitled to do so – and this was a recognisable defence in the proceedings brought against him for the maintenance debt. 

 

Question:

What can a man do if , due to a cut in his hours and salary, he can no longer keep up with the repayments on a  sizeable child maintenance debt  that has built up against him , as well as usual ongoing monthly sums ?

 

Answer:

Normally, a debtor who cannot pay back a sum for which a file has been opened against him at the bailiff’s office can undergo an examination of his ability to repay the debt . Usually this option is not available regarding maintenance as the person’s ability to pay has already been investigated during proceedings in court. However, this is not so regarding previous maintenance debts, for which it is possible to undergo an investigation of one’s ability to repay, at the Chief Bailiif’s. 

 

 

Question:

Was the chief Bailiff correct in agreeing to my ex-husband's request to close the maintenance file against him when our son became 18  if our divorce agreement said nothing about age ?

Answer:

Yes! When a judgment is given in connection with child maintenance but there is no mention of when this obligation ends (e.g. at the end of high school studies or until compulsory army service) it is supposed to end when the minor reaches the age of 18. Accordingly, the Chief Bailiff was correct to stop the maintenance payment when the child became 18. 

 

 

Question:

If a husband agrees to pay his wife money every month after they divorce at the rabbinate can she take advantage of the tough powers of the bailiff’s office if he defaults on payments ?

Answer:

Yes ! Even though according to Jewish law a man does not have to pay his ex-wife maintenance after their divorce, if he volunteers to make an agreement to pay her money every month then his divorcee can take advantage of the enforcement powers of the Chief Bailiff if he defaults on payments.

 

Those entitled to maintenance need it for their existence – and have a right to enforce it at the bailiff’s office, whether their rights derived from an agreement or a legal obligation, Tel Aviv District Court has held in an appeal case on the subject.  A divorcee who has a duly authorised court agreement in which her ‘ex’ is supposed to pay her money every month is equally entitled to enforce the judgment concerning this at the bailiff’s office – and benefit from the Bailiff’s powers of enforcement in maintenance cases, it was held. 
 

Editor’s Note –

Not every debt to a divorcee, according to a divorce agreement, is maintenance-based. It can come from one two sources – maintenance, or from the balancing out of the couple’s property relations, in which case it will be regarded as an ordinary debt, unconnected to maintenance. If the Chief Bailiff has any doubt regarding the interpretation of the judgment, he can use his powers and ask the court that gave the judgment to clarify it, to see if it is a maintenance debt. 

 

Question:

 

 

 

Question:

 

Is a husband against whom proceedings have been started at the Bailiff's limited time-wise to disputing the existence of a maintenance debt according to a judgment , or can he file it at any stage ?

Answer:

No, he can claim he has paid off the debt against him, in full or in part, at any time after the judgment has been given, and is not restricted, as the 1967 Bailiff’s Act does not set a deadline for claiming this defence.

 

 

 

Question:

Can  an mother owed child maintenance still ask for a ‘freeze’ on the father's  salary if she doesn't know his workplace, and how can she  find out the details ?

Answer:

Firstly, although it is possible to open the file to recover the maintenance debt and to ask for a freeze on father's salary, even without knowing the debtor’s workplace, it is preferable to find out these details beforehand. If these are unknown at the time the file is opened, the Chief Bailiff can give an order obliging the debtor to disclose details of his workplace. Alternatively , a private investigator can be hired to find out the information.

 

 

Question:

 

Will a personal guarantee from a foreign resident living abroad be enough to satisfy the Bailiff's court in Israel, and persuade it to cancel an order it put on him preventing him leaving Israel if he enters, so that he can come see his children freely, without being worried about being trapped ?and not be prevented from leaving,

Answer:

Not usually on its own. A personal guarantee by a foreign resident, even if he is an Israeli citizen, is likely to be problematic if it is not backed up by something else, because of the problem of actualizing it . Guarantees given by a foreign resident that are backed up somehow in Israel are likely to be acceptable.