it is impermissible in a loan. However, if the assignor transfers only part of the debt he owes, or transfers a claim for only part of what is owed to him, that is permissible, and the remaining balance stays in place with its original owner.

Condition 3: the assignor’s consent. Because the obligation is against him, he cannot be forced to discharge it by means of a ḥawāla. The assignee’s consent is not required, nor is the creditor’s consent when he is referred to a solvent party who is not known to procrastinate; rather, he is compelled to accept the ḥawāla and to claim his right from the assignee. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, “Delay on the part of a rich man is injustice; when any of you is referred to a solvent debtor, let him follow the reference,” Agreed upon. In another wording: “Whoever is assigned to a solvent debtor, let him accept the assignment.” A “solvent” person is one who is able to pay and is not known for delay. If the assignee is not solvent, the creditor is not obliged to accept a ḥawāla to him, because that would harm him.

Accordingly, our advice to those who owe people their rights yet possess the means to settle them is that they hasten to clear their liability—either by paying the creditors directly or by paying those to whom the debts have been assigned—and that they do not tarnish their reputations through procrastination and evasion. We all too often hear grievances from rightful claimants whose dues are delayed by debtors without any Sharīʿah-valid excuse. Likewise, we frequently hear of wealthy people procrastinating in paying the assignments directed to them, thereby exhausting the creditors, so much so that ḥawāla has become a frightening specter from which many people now recoil because of such injustice.