articles

ARTICLES

  • Home
    Home This is where you can find all the Article posts throughout the site.
  • Categories
    Categories Displays a list of categories from this Article.
  • Tags
    Tags Displays a list of tags that have been used in the Article.
  • Writers
    Writers Search for your favorite blogger from this site.
  • Login

AMJA Resident Fatwa Committee resolution about Islamic Home Financing Companies in the US.

Posted by on in Finance
  • Font size: Larger Smaller
  • Hits: 44582
  • 27 Comments
  • Subscribe to this entry
  • Print

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the name of Allah, the Compassionate, the Merciful

All praise are due to Allah alone and may the peace and blessings be upon the Messenger of Allah. To proceed:

The AMJA Fiqh Committee Resident Fatwa Committee met in Houston on the 20-22 of Dhul-Qadah 1435 A.H. (September 15-17 2014 C.E.) in order to issue a resolution concerning Islamic Home Financing in the United States. This meeting took place after an entire conference had previously been held on this topic, in which papers were discussed in the presence and with the participation of representatives of most of the relevant companies. This was followed up by correspondence between the Resident Fatwa Committee  Fiqh Committee and those companies with an attempt to clarify and respond to the Shareeah issues that are present in their contracts. Sh. Jamaal Zarabozo (may Allah preserve him) also participated in this meeting in Houston.

After looking into the matter, the Committee Resident Fatwa Committee (RFC) decided upon, according to the majority of its members, the following resolution:

First, the Shareeah fundamentals concerning the companies that deal in Islamic home financing:

Companies that deal with Islamic home financing in the United States may be divided into three categories:

The first group is comprised of those companies whose contracts, in general, are in agreement with the Shareeah. They are assisted by the fact that they are not in need of selling their contracts to the Public government-sponsored enterprises  federal, interest-based organizations [such as Freddie Mac]; this gives them the freedom to design their contracts in a manner in accord with the Shareeah without facing any restrictions from Public government-sponsored enterprises  interest-based financing institutions. At the same time, though, it is noted that the capabilities of these companies are quite limited. They are able to supply houses in the tens [as opposed to the thousands]. Furthermore, their availability is limited to certain states. Thus, they are not truly able to fulfill the needs of the millions of Muslims who reside in America.

The ruling of the RFC Committee is that it is permissible to deal with and purchase homes from companies of this nature.

The second group is comprised of those companies whose contracts, in general, avoid falling into explicit interest (Ribaa). They do not deal with interest-based loans. Instead, they deal in types of contracts that are permissible in the Shareeah in general, such as Murabahah cost-plus purchase order, Musharakah diminishing partnership and Ijarah rent-to-own. Many of the people who run these companies, we noticed, are anxious to avoid forbidden transactions and have exerted a great deal of effort with their legal advisors to produce legally sound contracts that will allow them to avoid what the Shareeah would consider void contracts. However, their contracts do contain some forbidden components, such as invalid clauses, inequity, undue risk, unknown quantities and the like. Additionally, they need to invoke exemptions allowed by the jurists and resort to an improper mixing of different schools of jurisprudence in order to devise a Shareeah-based way out [of the problem of interest]. In order to meet the large demands of the millions of Muslims residing in America, these companies are in need of selling their contracts to the federal institutions, such as Freddie Mac. These federal, interest-based institutions put a number of restrictions on them that virtually prevent their contracts from being free of these Islamic violations. These violations differ in intensity from one company to another.

The ruling of the RFC Committee specifically concerning this set of companies is that there is an exemption to buy through them in the case of need or dire need, depending on the different intensities of violations and the fact that need must be dealt with according to its severity.

We encourage these companies to continue their efforts in developing their contracts in order to bring an end to their shortcomings that the Committee has noted. If someone can find an alternative and not deal with these companies, he will be safe and will be protecting his faith and his honor.

The third group is comprised of companies that still continue to deal in interest-based loans. Their contracts are no more than offshoots of traditional interest-based loans or simply a form of impermissible legal stratagem to get around the prohibition of interest. The ruling of the RFC Committee with respect to these types of companies is that it is not allowed to purchase homes through them. We advise those who are administering these contracts to adjust them and make them proper.

Second, the Committee would like to emphasize that this ruling on this issue is directed towards those who wish to deal with these companies to purchase real estate via their financing and contracts and the ruling holds as long as the contracts are as they are in the present state and the modes of purchase are as they are now. Any change in their contracts or manner of execution would therefore require a change in the ruling.

As for the companies themselves, this ruling is actually in need of more clarification from them concerning their relationship with the Public government-sponsored enterprises federal financing institutions [such as Freddie Mac], a matter concerning which the RFC Committee was not able to receive a detailed clarification.

Third, “need” is that which is desired by an individual or society to make things easier on them and remove constraints. If one is lacking what is determined to be a “need,” then the individuals or the society face hardships and difficulties that go above and beyond the customary efforts required of individuals by the Shareeah. People may differ in estimating those hardships. However, the RFC Fatwa Committee views owning houses to be a general need of the Muslim population in America. As for determining the level of need for specific individuals, this would depend on the availability of a substitute in the form of being able to rent without being caused harm.

Fourth, below is the application of these principles to the Islamic financing companies that are operating throughout the United States:

Guidance Residential: They are based on a diminishing partnership with rent to own ending in ownership model in their relationship to the purchaser. Their contract is sound in general. However, it contains some Shareeah violations with respect to maintenance, taxes and insurance, as these expenses are not distributed in a just manner according to percentage of ownership.

The ruling of the RFC Committee concerning this company is that it is permissible to deal with them in the face of need. The representatives of this company are advised to review those defective portions of their contract.

Ameen Housing: (See updated Fatwa below) They are based on a diminishing partnership with rent to own ending in ownership model in their relationship to the purchaser. Their contracts are not sold to the federal institutions [such as Freddie Mac]. They also avoid explicit interest in their transactions. However, their contract does contain some Shareeah objections glitches , such as unfairness in the percentage that they discount in the rent to take care of basic maintenance, expenses that be more or less than that discounted amount. Additionally, they have just introduced a late payment fee [which is another violation of Shareeah principles]. 

The ruling of the RFC Committee is that there is no harm in dealing with this company in case of need, although one should do one’s best to make one’s payments on time in order to avoid the late payment fee. The Committee also encourages the company to abstain from those aspects pointed out by the Committee.

Addendum about Ameen Housing contract (As for Jan 2015)

All praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds, and may the blessings and peace be upon the final Prophet and upon all of his family and Companions.

The Fiqh Committee of AMJA had issued a declaration explaining the issues in the contracts of the Islamic Home Financing Companies in the United States. That ruling was based on the contracts that they used at the time of the issuing of that declaration. With respect to Ameen Housing, two issues were of major concern. One was the late payment fee when a person paid his rent late and the other was the issue of the cost of maintenance being properly distributed between the two parties wherein Ameen returned a fix percentage of the rent to the buyer/renter regardless of the actual amount of maintenance expenses.

After the issuing of that declaration, Ameen Housing—may Allah reward them for responding positively to that declaration—have now discontinued their late payment fee policy and have clarified to the Committee that the distribution of the maintenance expenses is handled in a way that is just.

Based on the above, the Fatwa Committee now rules that the contracts that Ameen Housing is now using are consistent with the laws of the Shareeah. We have now no Shareeah objection to their practice and it is permissible for Muslims to purchase homes through them.

Devon Bank: This company has two types of Islamic contracts:

The first contract is Murabahah a cost-plus purchase. This contract is surrounded by doubts concerning whether the bank truly owns the property before it is readied for sale. In addition, this contract also contains some defective or problematic conditions or aspects of great unfairness, such as with respect to (a) the bank having exclusive benefits from insurance payouts while requiring the purchaser to pay for the insurance, (b) the bank’s right to freeze the purchaser’s account simply on the suspicion that he will not be able to make his payments, (c) the bank’s right to declare the purchaser in default if he does not use the property as a residence or due to his death although heirs have the right to continue the contract after his death, in fact the cost-plus purchase contract states that the heirs are bound by the contract.

The ruling of the Committee is that there is no harm in dealing with this [contract of] this company in the presence of dire need. Whoever remains away from it has kept himself safe and has protected his faith and honor.  The Committee advises the Bank to correct these aspects and to affirm the ownership of the property before selling it and to avoid the other invalid conditions as much as possible.

The second contract is a rent to own contract. This also contains a number of Shareeah violations and invalid conditions, including having two different contracts (sale and lease) at one time, about one item during one time period. Various Fiqh councils have ruled that this model is not permissible as the legal effects of the two types of contracts are contradictory. This may be corrected by separating the two contracts by making them independent of each other time-wise, such that the sale contract is done after the lease contract, which must be a true lease and not something meant to simply hide the sale. Or, they [may replace the sale] with a promise of handing over ownership at the end of the lease.

From among the defective or void stipulations that this contract embodies are the fact that the bank can evict the lessee upon default but the bank still holds him responsible for the rent until they can find a new renter, the fact that the bank does not pay for the basic maintenance of the property and the fact that the lessee is required to pay insurance while the bank retains the right of any payments from the insurance, allowing the bank to benefit while the lessee bears the cost.

The ruling of the Committee is that there is no harm in dealing with this [contract of this] company when one is in a state of dire need. Whoever remains away from it has kept himself safe and has protected his faith and honor. The Committee emphasizes its recommendation to the bank to rectify the current model by separating between the two contracts and avoiding the defective or void stipulations as much as possible.

University Islamic Financial: The same comments concerning their cost-plus model and lease-to-own models as were stated concerning Devon Bank can be repeated here. Thus, their models have the same rulings and the Committee offers them the same advice. There is an exemption to deal with this company only if one is in a state of dire need. Whoever remains away from it has kept himself safe and has protected his faith and honor.

Ijara Loan: This company starts by directing the purchaser to get a standard interest-based [mortgage] loan and then creates a trust with the purchaser a partner in the trust, in order to borrow from the bank and then get ownership of the property. After that, the trust will sell the house to the purchaser with a rent-to-own contract. The purchaser is alone in getting the interest-based loan at the beginning and then shares in it at the end.

The ruling of the Committee is that it is not allowed to deal with this company as their model contains clear and explicit interest. We advise those in charge of this company to review and correct their model and to fulfill the trust that has been put in them by those who wish to avoid interest in their financial dealings.

Lariba: The contract of this company does not differ from a traditional mortgage that interest-based banks provide. This is the overriding contract between this company and the purchaser and what they present as an Islamic form to it actually has no existence in reality and has no legal authority in case of dispute.

The ruling of the Committee is that it is not allowed to deal with this company as their model contains clear and explicit interest. We advise those in charge of this company to review and correct their model and to fulfill the trust that has been put in them by those who wish to avoid interest in their financial dealings.

Additionally, the Committee would like to emphasize that the rulings previously made that are on the AMJA website represent the views of those individual scholars and do not necessarily represent the views of the RFC Committee. Furthermore, those rulings preceded this ruling and it could be the case that some of the scholars have adjusted their views to the views of the Committee. Finally, the Committee would like to encourage those Muslims who have experience and those who have funds to invest to create a competitive Islamic alternative, perhaps a credit union among themselves which may have profit in this world and we hope also a profit in the Hereafter if the intentions are sound. 

May Allah bless everyone with acts of obedience to Him and may be the blessings of Allah be upon His best creation, Muhammad, and upon all his family and all of his Companions.

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

الحمد لله والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله أما بعد

    فقد اجتمعت لجنة الفتوى بالمجمع في مدينة هيوستن من يوم الإثنين إلى يوم الأربعاء :  20 إلى 22 من ذي القعدة 1435هـ الموافق 15 إلى 17 سبتمبر 2014 مـ لإصدار قرار بخصوص الشركات الإسلامية لتمويل شراء البيوت بأمريكا وذلك بعد أن انعقدت دورة  كاملة لمناقشة البحوث المقدمة بهذا الصدد في حضور ممثلين لمعظم هذه الشركات ، ثم ما أعقب ذلك من تواصل مع بعض هذه الشركات ولجانها الشرعية، لتلقي إجاباتهم عن الإشكالات الشرعية الموجودة في عقودهم، وشارك في الاجتماع فضيلة الشيخ جمال زارابوزو حفظه الله.

  وبعد الاطلاع عليها اتخذت لجنة الفتوى بأغلبية أعضائها  قرارها التالي:

أولا: تأصيل شرعي لحال الشركات التي تعمل في مجال التمويل الإسلامي لشراء البيوت

الشركات الإسلامية لتمويل شراء البيوت بأمريكا تنقسم إلى ثلاث فئات :  

الفئة الأولى : شركات عقودها في الجملة متوافقة مع الشريعة الإسلامية، ومما ساعد على ذلك أنها شركات لا تحتاج إلى بيع عقودها إلى مؤسسات الاستثمار الفيدرالية الربوية، الأمر الذي أعطاها الحرية في صياغة عقودها بكيفية موافقة للشريعة، من غير تعرض لضغوط من شركات التمويل الربوية، إلا أنه يلاحظ على هذه الشركات أن إمكاناتها محدودة، ولا تستطيع توفير بيوت للبيع إلا عددا لا يجاوز العشرات، ونطاق عملها محدود بولاية معينة، فلا تسد حاجة ملايين المسلمين المقيمين بأمريكا.

وفتوى اللجنة بخصوص هذه الفئة من الشركات هو جواز التعامل معها، والشراء عن طريقها.

الفئة الثانية : شركات عقودها في الجملة  قد تجنبت الوقوع في الربا الصريح، فلا تتعامل بالإقراض الربوي، وإنما تتعامل بعقود مباحة في الشريعة من حيث الجملة، كبيع المرابحة للآمر بالشراء، والمشاركة المتناقصة، والإجارة المنتهية بالتمليك،  وقد لمسنا من كثير من القائمين على هذه الشركات حرصا على تجنب المعاملات المحرمة، وبذلا لجهد كبير مع مستشاريهم القانونيين لإيجاد مخارج قانونية تجنبهم الوقوع في مبطلات العقود ، إلا أن عقودها قد اشتملت على بعض المعاملات المحرمة كالشروط الفاسدة، والعقود المشتملة على الغبن والغرر والجهالة ونحوه، واحتاجت إلى تتبع رخص الفقهاء، والتلفيق بين المذاهب، لإيجاد مخارج شرعية، نظرا لكونها شركات تحتاج إلى بيع عقودها إلى مؤسسات الاستثمار الفيدرالية الربويةمثل فريدي ماك ، من أجل أن تتمكن من بيع ما يكفي لسد حاجة ملايين المسلمين المقيمين بأمريكا، وشركات الاستثمار الفيدرالية الربوية تضع عليهم قيودا تمنعهم من تنقية عقودهم من أكثر هذه المخالفات، وهذه المخالفات تتفاوت من شركة إلى أخرى.

     وفتوى اللجنة بخصوص هذه الفئة من الشركات هو الترخص في الشراء عند الحاجة أو الحاجة الماسّة، تبعاً لتفاوت درجة المخالفة، على أن تقدر الحاجة بقدرها.

   ونحثّ هذه الشركات على مواصلة سعيها لتطوير عقودها لتلافي أوجه القصور التي نبهت عليها اللجنة، ومن توفر له بديل فاستغنى به فقد آثر السلامة، واستبرأ لدينه وعرضه!

 الفئة الثالثة : شركات لا تزال تتعامل بالإقراض الربوي، وعقودها لا تعدو أن تكون استنساخا لعقود التمويل الربوية التقليدية، أو حيلاً غير مشروعة، وفتوى اللجنة بخصوص هذه الفئة من الشركات هو أنه لا يجوز الشراء عن طريقها، وننصح القائمين عليها بتصحيح عقودهم.

ثانيا: يؤكد المجمع أن فتواه في هذا الصدد تتجه إلى المتعاملين مع هذه الشركات من الراغبين في تملك عقارات من خلال تمويلها وعقودها، ما دامت العقود على ما هي عليه عند إصدار هذا البيان ، ومادام تطبيق الشركات للصّفقات على ما هو عليه ، فأي تغيير في العقود أو في طريقة تنفيذها قد يؤدّي إلى اختلاف الفتوى.

     أما الشركات نفسها فيحتاج الإفتاء لكثير منها إلى مزيد من الاستقصاء حول علاقتها بشركات الاستثمار الفيدرالية، الأمر الذي لم يتسنّ للمجمع الاستفصال بشأنه، والوقوف على تفاصيله

ثالثاً:الحاجة هي ما يطلبهالأفراد أو المجتمع للتوسعة ورفع الضيق، فإذا فاتت دخل على آحاد المكلفين أو المجتمع حرج ومشقة خارجة عن المشقة المعتادة في التكاليف الشرعية. وقد يختلف نظر الناس في تقديرها، ولكن لجنة الفتوى بالمجمع ترى أن تملك البيوت للسكن يعد حاجة عامة للمسلمين المقيمين بأمريكا. أما تقدير الحاجة الخاصة لآحادهم فيرجع إلى وجود البديل الإيجاري المناسب من غير ضرر.

رابعاً : تطبيق هذا التأصيل على واقع شركات التمويل الإسلامي العاملة في الساحة الأمريكية

Guidance Residential

وهي تعتمد أسلوب المشاركة المتناقصة المنتهية بالتمليك في علاقتها بعملائها، وعقودها صحيحة في الجملة، ولكن يكتنفها بعض المخالفات الشرعية التي تتعلق بالصيانة والضرائب والتأمين حيث لا توزع بصورة عادلة على أساس حصص الشركاء.

وفتوى اللجنة بشأنها جواز التعامل معها للحاجة، وتوجيه النصح للقائمين عليها بمراجعة هذه الشروط الفاسدة.  

Ameen Housing

هذه الشركة تعتمد أسلوب الإجارة المتناقصة المنتهية بالتمليك في علاقتها بعملائها، ولا تبيع عقودها لشركات الاستثمار الفيدرالية، وقد تجنبت الربا الصريح في معاملاتها، إلا أن عقودها لا تزال تكتنفها بعض الملاحظات الشرعية، كالغبن الذي يتمثل في تحديدها نسبة مئوية من الأجرة مقابل تكاليف الصيانة الأساسية، التي قد تزيد عن ذلك وقد تنقص، ومثل ما استحدثته مؤخرا من إلزامها المستأجر بغرامة تأخيرية عند التأخر عن الوفاء بالتزاماته المالية.

 وفتوى اللجنة أنه لا حرج في التعامل مع هذه الشركة عند الحاجة، مع الحرص على الوفاء بالالتزامات في مواقيتها حتى لا يقع تحت طائلة شرط الغرامة التأخيرية، ومع توصية الشركة بتلافي هذه الملاحظات التي أشارت إليها اللجنة.

فتوى معدلة لعقد Ameen Housing

 الحمد لله رب العالمين والصلاة والسلام على خاتم النبيين وعلى آله وصحبه أجمعين أما بعد

فقد كانت لجنة الإفتاء بمجمع فقهاء الشريعة قد أصدرت بيانا توضح فيه مآخذها الشرعية على عقود الشركات الإسلامية لتمويل شراء البيوت بالولايات المتحدة وكان مما ذكر فيه أنه بناء على العقود التي كانت تتعامل بها الشركات وقت صدور البيان فإن شركة أمين هاوسنغ يؤخذ عليها أمران هما تكليف المستأجر بدفع  غرامة عند تأخره عن سداد الدفعات الإيجارية في موعدها وتكليف المستأجر كذلك بدفع نسبة مئوية ثابتة من الدفعات الإيجارية للصيانة بغض النظر عن القيمة الفعلية لتكاليف الصيانة

ثم إنه بعد صدور بيان المجمع فإن شركة أمين هاوسنغ مأجورة مشكورة استجابت لهذا البيان فألغت غرامة التأخير وأوضحت للجنة أن تكاليف الصيانة تقسّم بطريقة ٍ عادلة

وبناء على ذلك فإن لجنة الفتوى تفتي الآن بأن شركة الأمين عقودها المعمول بها حاليا موافقة لأحكام الشريعة الإسلامية وليس لنا عليها مأخذ شرعي ويجوز للمسلمين شراء البيوت عن طريقه

Devon Bank

وهو يتعامل بنوعين من العقود الإسلامية:

العقد الأول: المرابحة، ويكتنف هذا العقد شبهات حول التملك الحقيقي من قبل البنك للعقار قبل إعادة بيعه، بالإضافة إلى تضمنه بعض الشروط الفاسدة أو التي فيها غبن ٌ فاحشٌ، منها: الاستئثار بتعويضات التأمين مع إلزام العميل بدفع أقساطه، وحقّ البنك بتجميد حساب العميل لمجرّد الشك بعدم قدرته على السّداد، وحقّه في إعلان إخفاق العميل إذا لم يستخدم العقار لغايات السّكنى، أو عند موته، مع أنّ من حقّ ورثته أن يتولّوا العقد بعد ميّتهم، بل ذكر عقد المرابحه نفسه أن الورثة ملزمون بما في العقد !

   وفتوى اللجنة أنه لا حرج في التعامل مع هذه الشركة بهذه الصيغة عند الحاجة الماسّة ، ومن تورع فقد آثر السلامة، واستبرأ لدينه وعرضه

    ويوصي المجمع البنك بالعمل على تصحيح هذه الصورة، وذلك بالتأكيد على ملكية البنك للعقار قبل بيعه، وتجنب الشروط الفاسدة ما استطاع.

العقد الثاني: الإجارة المنتهية بالتمليك، وتكتنفه مخالفات شرعية وشروط فاسدة، ومن ذلك: ورود عقدين مختلفين (البيع والإجارة)  في وقت واحد، على عين واحدة، في زمن واحد، وهي الصورة التي صدرت قرارات المجامع الفقهية بمنعها، لتعارض آثار العقدين، ويمكن تصحيحها بالفصل بين العقدين بحيث  يستقل كل منهما عن الآخر زماناً، فيكون إبرام عقد البيع بعد عقد الإجارة التي ينبغي أن تكون فعلية وليست ساترة للبيع، أو وجود وعد بالتمليك في نهاية مدة الإجارة.

ومن الشروط الفاسدة حق طرد العميل من العقار عند إخفاقه مع تغريمة الأجرة حتى يجد البنك عميلاً آخر، وعدم التزام البنك بتكاليف الصيانة الأساسية، وإلزامه العميل بدفع قسط التأمين مع احتفاظ البنك بحق أخذ تعويضات التأمين لنفسه، فعلى العميل الغرم وللبنك الغنم!

     وفتوى اللجنة أنه لا حرج في التعامل مع هذه الشركة بهذه الصيغة عند الحاجة الماسّة ، ومن تورع فقد آثر السلامة، واستبرأ لدينه وعرضه، ويؤكد المجمع توصية البنك بالعمل على تصحيح هذه الصورة بالفصل بين العقدين، وتجنب الشروط الفاسدة ما استطاع

Islamic University Financial

  ويرد على عقدي هذه الشركة مرابحة و إجارة ما سبق إيراده على عقدي المرابحة والإجارة المنتهية بالتمليك لدى ديفون بنك، فيمتهد لهما نفس الحكم، ونفس النصيحة! فيترخص في التعامل معها عند الحاجة الماسة، ومن تورع فقد استبرأ لدينه وعرضه!

Ijara Loan

    وهذه الشركة تبدأ بتوجيه العميل إلى قرض ربوي بين، ثم تنشىء شركة اعتبارية يكون العميل جزءا منها، لتقترض من البنك وتتملك العقار، ثم تعيد بيعه إلى المشتري بعقد إجارة منتهية بالتمليك، فالمشتري تفرد بالقرض الربوي في البداية، ثم شارك فيه في النهاية!

   وفتوى اللجنة أنه لا يجوز التعامل بعقود هذه الشركة لما تتضمنه من الربا الجلي الصريح! وننصح للقائمين عليها بمراجعة هذه الصيغة وتصحيحها، وفاء بالأمانة التي أناطها بهم عملاؤهم ممن يريدون التحرر من الربا في معاملاتهم المالية.

Lariba

      وعقد هذه الشركة لا يختلف عن العقود الربوية التقليدية التي تبرمها البنوك الربوية، وهذا هو العقد الحاكم لهذه المعاملة وللعلاقة بين أطرافها، وما يقدم من صورة تعاقد إسلامية هي صورة افتراضية لا وجود لها في الواقع العملي، ولا يحتكم إليها عند التنازع.

     وفتوى اللجنة أنه لا يجوز التعامل بعقود هذه الشركة لما تتضمنه من الربا الجلي الصريح! وننصح للقائمين عليها بمراجعة هذه الصيغة وتصحيحها، وفاء بالأمانة التي أناطها بهم عملاؤهم ممن يريدون التحرر من الربا في معاملاتهم المالية.

    هذا، وتودّ اللجنة أن تؤكّد على أن الفتاوى المنشورة على موقع المجمع من قبل حول حكم التعامل مع شركة ٍ بعينها إنّما هي لآحاد المفتين ولا تمثّل رأي اللجنة بالضّرورة ، كما أنها سابقةٌ تاريخاً لهذه الفتوى ، فقد يكون بعض المفتين قد عدل عن رأيه القديم إلى رأي اللجنة . كما تحثّ لجنة الفتوى رجال الأعمال وأصحاب رؤوس الأموال من المسلمين على الاستعجال بإيجاد البديل الإسلامي المنافس، ولعلّ الاتحادات الائتمانية Credit Unions من بينها،  فهي تجارة رابحةٌ في الدنيا، ونرجو أن تكون كذلك في الآخرة أن صلحت النّيّات.

 وفّق الله الجميع لطاعته، وصلى الله على خير خلقه محمد، وعلى آله وصحبه أجمعين.

 

Rate this Article entry:
23

Comments

  • Guest
    Mohamed Hussein Tuesday, 14 October 2014

    JazakumAllahu Khairan

    To my dear respected Scholars, and leaders of the community; JazakumAllahu Khairan for your research, concern, and advice. May Allah elevate you, and the community through you!

  • Guest
    Mohamed Hassan Tuesday, 14 October 2014

    JazaakumuAllahu Khayran all

    BarakaAllahu feekum. May Allah swt bless our scholars and protect them from all harms. Allahuma Ameen!
    Indeed they did a great work.

  • Guest
    Abdullah Abdurrahman Thursday, 16 October 2014

    Guest

    Assalamualaikum,
    AREES University provided a 100% Shariah solution without looking for excuses, necessities and special cases! It's strange that you totally ignored that!

  • Guest
    Duston B. Monday, 20 October 2014

    Arees?

    Brother Abdullah Abdurrahman, I looked at the AREES University and could not find any home finance options; can you please direct me to that?

  • Guest
    DustonB Monday, 20 October 2014

    Building a home?

    I've called most of these financial institutions over the course of the last year as I am trying to build a home.

    NONE of them have a solution for home building.

    Wouldn't that indicate that there is an inherent flaw in the entire construct of the loan system?

    Or does it mean that Muslims are not allowed to build new homes and must depend on buying used homes from non-Muslims?

  • Guest
    Adeel Friday, 17 April 2015

    Re: Building a home?

    ASAK,
    Id like to see a reply on that as well just like many thousands other.

  • Guest
    Abdullah Abdurrahman Monday, 20 October 2014

    Abdullah Abdurrahman

    DustonB: I agree with you 100% that's why AREES University offered a solution without "loan system" and a big real estate company in America agreed to work it out!
    the study of AREES University was published in Global Islamic Economic Magazine Vol. 25 pages 42-43

  • Guest
    Omar Thursday, 30 October 2014

    What about Halal Inc.?

    Asalamo-Alikom,

    I have seen a new program by a company called Halal Inc. Their website seems to suggest that they overcome the Sharia issues related to the other offerings. Are you familiar with this company? And if so, what is the opinion of the AMJA Resident Fatwa Company's analysis of this offering?
    http://halalinc.com

  • Guest
    Tarik Monday, 08 December 2014

    What about Halal Inc.?

    Salam Omar,
    It seems to be a phantom company no answer on calls and no email address !

  • Guest
    Guest Friday, 02 January 2015

    Guest

    Halal Inc does exist, but doesn't have available financing in Texas at this time, I was contacted by them in December 2014 regarding financing and was told that by Ahmed Saad when he replied to my email.

    http://halalinc.com/Lead_Buyer_Signup.php

  • Guest
    Abu Ameen Sunday, 01 February 2015

    What about investment properties?

    Can I use Guidance for purchasing or refinancing an investment property that I am renting?

  • Guest
    Tarik Sunday, 08 February 2015

    What about investment properties?

    Salam, It's worse please read the article and check the RIBA video series from Dr Main Al-Qudah to help you understand a lot about this topic: http://www.amjaonline.org/en/multimedia/video-library
    Sometimes you don't even have to ask a fatwa you may already know the answer , may Allah teach us .

  • Guest
    hashim Tuesday, 03 March 2015

    Alrayan Bank UK

    Alsalamo Aleikom
    I appreciate you are interested in USA banks but since you have reviewed this issue thoroughly I would like to know your opinion on the Alrayan bank in UK (formerly Islamic Bank of britain). They provide lots of info in their website. Paricularly:
    1- how they go round insurance and maintenance.
    2- late payment fees.
    3- paying the price of the house day 1 rather than updating the real price of the house.
    4- linking the rent to bank of england interest rate and changing it every 3 months

    Many thanks

  • Guest
    Bilal Wednesday, 04 March 2015

    Guidance Residential Contract Question

    Aoa,

    My question is in reference to the following with regards to Guidance residential's diminishing partnership contract:
    "...it contains some Shareeah violations with respect to maintenance, taxes and insurance, as these expenses are not distributed in a just manner according to percentage of ownership"

    Do these violations fall under the category of usury? I am also struggling to understand, how these items are Shariah violations and what is the associated Shariah penalty?

    Is it correct to say that Guidance offering is 100% usury free?

    JazakAllah

  • Guest
    Mazher Monday, 30 March 2015

    ISNA housing and Ansar housing at Canada

    Assalamo Alaikum

    Could you please evaluate following financing companies as they claim its Riba free financing in Canada. Are they Sharia compliants ?

    http://www.isnahousing.org/
    http://www.ansarhousing.com/

    Their model is same as diminishing partnership with rent to own however they ask buyer to
    1. pay all maintenance fee and
    2. property tax
    They don't do any sharing on those fee. Please advise so that poeple like me don't get confused and do the right decision. Jazak Allah fof the immense research work you have done and saved so many people from interest.

    Wassalam
    Mazher

  • Guest
    Abdullah Saturday, 16 May 2015

    ISNA housing and Ansar housing Canada

    I asked the same question on Islamqa.com a few weeks ago, still waiting for the fatwa. I will update you.

  • Guest
    N. Saleh Monday, 30 March 2015

    AMJA needs to review/clarify their Fatwa on Ameen Housing Sharia compliance since it is based on wrong information

    Ameen Housing Co-op (AHC) exercises unfair contractual practice even according to the canonical secular law of the land but AMJA has unexplainably decided to provide Sharia sanctions for this practice. Here are some details:
    1. AHC does not pay its fair portion of ownership of property tax, property insurance, Home-Owner-Association fees, Mello Roos, or any other ownership based financial obligation. AHC offers only 7% discount of the monthly rent they levy
    2. AHC charges $800 for merely filling out a loan application for housing and also charges $1,500/month if the applicant fails to buy a property, up to 2 months after which the application expires. None of these fees are refundable even though there are no services rendered in return
    3. AHC charges $75/month to process the monthly rent payment and does not provide automated payment option to avoid this charge

    Can AMJA council justify their Fatwa regarding AHC Sharia compliance in the light of the information provided above?

    Thanks and JAK.

    Thanks and JAK.

  • Guest
    Moin Quazi Saturday, 04 April 2015

    Halal Inc.

    Mr N. Saleh- you are right. I also got put off by their various fees, which are very high dollar amounts.
    I just went thru the website of Halal Inc. The program does sound very Islamic according to my knowledge. Can somebody please shed some light on this program.
    Jazaak Allah

  • Guest
    Aiman Friday, 10 April 2015

    Ameen Housing as investment

    Assalamu Alaykom,

    I'm happy to hear that Ameen Housing are 100% Islamic. I'm wondering if there are any specifics to know for people who are only interested in becoming investors (i.e. not owning a home). Is that permissible?

  • Guest
    N. Saleh Friday, 10 April 2015

    Re: Ameen Housing as investment

    Dear Alman, You can contact Ameen Housing directly. If you read my post above, if Ameen Housing plays it fairly as I indicated above, they will be much less profitable than they are now. As for the AMJA fatwa for Ameen Housing, I think it is under review now. I suspect AMJA did not look carefully into their model based on a phone conversation I had with them recently.

Leave your comment

Guest Saturday, 01 October 2016