“I arranged with Simon Kleinoff, the plumber, to clear the blockage in the kitchen sink this morning,” Mr. Laks told his wife.

“Oh, great!” she replied.

Simon arrived at 10 o’clock. He worked for a half hour, going in and out of the house to bring tools from his car.

Mrs. Laks came into the kitchen and opened the drawer near the sink.

“Have you seen my ring?” she asked Simon suspiciously.

“No, I haven’t,” Simon responded in a surprised voice.

“I left my ring in the kitchen drawer when I cleaned the kitchen this morning,” Mrs. Laks confided to her husband, panic-stricken. “There was no one else in the house other than Simon all morning, and he’s been in and out to his car numerous times.”

“Are you sure that you left it in the drawer?” Mr. Laks asked her.

“Absolutely positive,” she said. “I also noticed that the drawer was ajar and had been rummaged through.”

Mr. Laks went over to Simon.

“My wife is missing her ring,” he said. “She is positive that she left it in the drawer near the sink this morning, and only you were in the house today.”

“How dare you accuse me?” said Simon indignantly. “Your wife probably moved it and forgot where she put it.”

“She is sure she left it in the drawer,” said Mr. Laks emphatically.

“You have no evidence that I took it,” said Simon, shaking his head angrily. “Anyway, I just finished clearing the sink blockage. You owe me $150 for the repair and I’ll be off.”

“I’m not paying anything,” said Mr. Laks. “I’m holding the repair payment in lieu of the ring, until we discuss this with Rabbi Dayan.”

“We’d better do that,” retorted Simon. “Let’s go right now!”

“My wife left her ring in the kitchen drawer, and it was taken,” Mr. Laks said to Rabbi Dayan. “Mr. Kleinoff was working in the kitchen then and was the only other person in the house. What recourse do we have?”

“A person who makes a definite claim but has no evidence or testimony can impose an oath (shevuas heses) on the other party who denies the claim,” answered Rabbi Dayan. “Although, in general, a person cannot impose an oath without a definite claim, Rema writes that a person can impose an oath if there is a strong basis (raglayim ladavar) for the claim, even if it is not definite (C.M. 75:17).”

“What is an example of something that is considered a strong basis?” asked Mr. Laks.

“Let’s say someone was in your house. You find your money box broken and the contents stolen, and you suspect that person. You can impose an oath upon him,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “However, the Shach (75:63) questions the Rema’s ruling. He concludes that it depends on the evaluation of the beis din; if they see sufficient basis for the allegation, they can impose an oath upon the accused.”

“I understand that nowadays beis din is wary about imposing an oath,” said Mr. Laks. “Anyway, I want to withhold Mr. Kleinoff’s wages!”

“This is a complicated issue,” replied Rabbi Dayan. “The Sma (75:49) writes that if the plaintiff grabs payment from the suspected thief unobserved (so that there is no evidence that he grabbed), he can keep the payment. Shach (75:64) and Taz (75:17) vehemently disagree; a person cannot take money from another when there is an element of doubt. Pischei Teshuvah (75:20) cites varying opinions of later authorities.

“Bottom line: since the plaintiff is already in possession of the money, he can keep it when he has a clear basis for his claim (see Pischei Choshen, Geneivah 1:[13]).”

“Then I should be able to withhold the wages,” said Mr. Laks, “since I am in possession of the money.”

“It would seem so, provided that no one else was in the house and, due to the circumstances, your wife is sure that Mr. Kleinoff stole and not just that there is a good chance (see 408:2; Pischei Teshuvah 75:20).”