Israeli Roadside Assistance Charity Faces $625,000 Lawsuit
Translated & summarized from Ice by baba
The Israeli roadside assistance organization Yedidim is facing a NIS 2.5 million class-action lawsuit alleging illegal donation requests. The charity denies the claims and warns it could impact its free services, while thousands of beneficiaries have spoken out against the suit.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- Yedidim, a free roadside assistance charity, faces a NIS 2.5 million class-action lawsuit.
- The suit alleges illegal donation requests were sent without consent.
- The organization warns the lawsuit could halt its free services.
- The plaintiff previously received aid from Yedidim and settled a similar suit.
- Thousands of beneficiaries oppose the lawsuit.
The Israeli non-profit "Yedidim - Assistance on the Road," which provides free roadside assistance to drivers with a network of approximately 65,000 volunteers, is facing a potential class-action lawsuit seeking NIS 2.5 million (approximately $625,000 USD).
The lawsuit, filed by Amit Vergapht, alleges that Yedidim sent him a donation request without his consent, in violation of communication laws. The organization, founded in 2006, offers services such as changing flat tires, jump-starting vehicles, and unlocking car doors, including rescuing children locked inside.
Yedidim denies the allegations and warns that a significant financial penalty could jeopardize its ability to continue offering free services. Notably, Vergapht himself has previously received assistance from the organization. A similar lawsuit he filed in 2022 was settled with a NIS 1,000 payment. He reportedly sought help again two years later after his vehicle broke down.
Thousands of drivers who have benefited from Yedidim's services, led by former Knesset member Avir Kara, have voiced opposition to the lawsuit, stating it does not represent them. However, it is important to note that this is currently only a request to certify the class action, and no ruling has been made confirming the organization's violation of the law.
Vergapht's representatives stated the claims are not directed at volunteers but at the sending of messages to over a million people without consent. They also claim to have submitted an affidavit from a recipient who received 11 messages over two years and that a meeting with the organization's CEO and a warning letter preceded the court filing. Vergapht summarized his position by stating, "The ends do not justify the means."
