Q: A person who enhanced another’s property, even without being asked, is generally entitled to payment. Some explain that this is because of the inherent benefit and increased monetary value that he provided the owner; others explain because we presume that post-facto the owner consents to the work done for him, unless he has reason or clearly indicates that he does not want the enhancement.
A: Depending on the aforementioned rationales, the Poskim dispute under what circumstances the owner can tell the enhancer to remove the enhancement, or can claim that he would have preferred to do it himself, rather than paying for it. There is a fundamental distinction between properties fit for such enhancement and those not fit, regarding both the claim to remove the enhancement and the amount of payment due to the enhancer, whether the going rate or the lesser of the expenditure/benefit.
The rules of yored l’sedei Chaveiro apply not only to physical enhancements but also to services provided to benefit another person.
Summary/Conclusion
