1. Zaid purchased a car from Bakr for R60 000.00 on credit, with instalments of R2000.00 per month.
Zaid made payments and was late on one month. He asked Bakr if he could give him a week or two to pay and Bakr agreed. (Bakr was apparently assisting his Muslim brother who needed a car )
Bakr received information from a third party (informant) that Zaid is a faasiq involved in certain sins. Bakr was also told by the informant that Zaid will no longer afford to pay the instalments.
But the informant had a vendetta against Zaid and was his enemy trying to destroy his name. Bakr was shown proof of this.
Bakr ignored the proof and took the word of the malicious informant, did not investigate the matterand just accepted what the informant said.
Bakr told Zaid that he is coming to take “his” (bakr’s) car in three weeks Bakr then “out of the blue” came and stole the car from Zaid using a spare key, without informing him. Zaid had to find this out from the police.
Bakr contacted Zaid and told Zaid that he is taking the car back as he does not approve of Zaid’s lifestyle (based on what he heard from informant) and also because informant told Bakr that he cannot afford instalments. Bakr made no offer for Zaid to pay the balance in one instalment nor did Bakr inform Zaid that he was coming to take the car away.
Bakr’s reason was not money or any other issue but simply what he was told by informant.
He then refunded Zaid the instalments paid. Zaid was not happy but was forced to just accept this as he had no legal recourse within the law of the country.
• Was Bakr within his rights and is he allowed to do this (as explained) according to sharia?
• Who does the car really belong to? At the time Bakr took the car there was no outstanding instalments.
• Was zulm made on Zaid?
• Did Bakr commit theft?
• What Is the general view of the Sharia on bakr’s actions and the situation described?
2. Now Bakr is claiming mileage for the usage of the car whilst it was in Zaid’s possession even though it was Zaid’s car and he was paying instalments. Is Bakr correct in making this claim?
3. Zaid did work to uplift the car as he obviously understood that the car is now his. Can he claim for such mechanical and interior improvements from Bakr now that the car is gone back to Zaid against Bakr’s will?
Any naseehat for the parties involved?