Court Cancels Will, Rules Renovator Exploited Elderly Couple
Translated & summarized from Bizportal by baba
A Tel Aviv court voided a will that favored a renovator over a husband of 42 years, ruling the renovator exerted undue influence on a childless elderly couple. The couple sold two apartments for a total of 2.9 million shekels, with their finances subsequently declining. The court ordered the renovator to pay 250,000 shekels in expenses and referred the case to the police and state attorney. The husband will inherit his wife's estate.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- A Tel Aviv court canceled a will, ruling a renovator unduly influenced an elderly couple.
- The couple sold two apartments for 2.9 million shekels, with their finances subsequently declining.
- The renovator was ordered to pay 250,000 shekels in expenses and referred to police.
- The court cited evidence of deception, fraud, and the renovator's own financial difficulties.
- The husband will inherit his wife's estate as per Israeli inheritance law.
- A psychiatrist's note described the wife's relationship with the renovator as with a 'lover'.
A Tel Aviv family court has canceled a will that left an estate to a renovator, ruling that he unduly influenced an childless elderly couple to sell their two apartments and leave him as their sole heir. The court found the renovator, who had entered the couple's lives through their mother's nursing home, engaged in "deception and fraud" to seize their assets. The judge, Esther Zhitnitsky Rakover, ordered the renovator to pay 250,000 shekels in expenses and forwarded the ruling to the state attorney and police.
The couple, married for 42 years, sold two apartments for 1.7 million and 1.2 million shekels respectively. When the wife died in 2021, her bank account was overdrawn by 120,000 shekels. The will she left behind disinherited her husband and named the renovator as the sole beneficiary. The husband, represented by attorney Roni Sharabi, argued the renovator, whom he described as a "Trojan horse," convinced them to sell the apartments and took advantage of their lack of close relatives.
The renovator claimed he had a close, son-like relationship with the couple and that they sold their apartments willingly. However, the court noted the renovator was facing bankruptcy at the time and that the couple's finances deteriorated significantly after selling their properties. Evidence presented included allegations of the renovator using the wife's credit card for large purchases, selling gold coins found in their apartment without proper accounting, and even using the wife's Lexus for his own purposes.
The judge found the renovator's actions constituted undue influence, particularly citing a psychiatrist's note from shortly after the will was signed, which described the wife's relationship with the renovator as being with a "lover." The court also noted inconsistencies in the testimony of the lawyers involved in drafting the will, one of whom was found to know a relative of the renovator. The ruling stated that the burden of proof shifted to the renovator to demonstrate the absence of undue influence, a burden he failed to meet. The husband will inherit his wife's estate according to law.
