Paid 40,000 Shekels for a Kindergarten Shelter — Left Without Money or Protection

Netanel and Rivka Atias, owners of a kindergarten, found themselves in the middle of March, at the height of the war, dealing with an existential need: ensuring a protected space for the children entrusted to their care. Driven by this sense of urgency, they contacted a contractor who offered them a quick solution. After paying a down payment of 40,000 shekels, they received a promise that sounded like a ray of light amidst the uncertainty. "They promised to deliver the protective unit within 14 business days," says Netanel in an interview with the program "HaOlam HaBoker" ("The World This Morning"). This promise gave them the hope that they could finally provide parents and children with the required security, but the hope quickly faded when the unit was not delivered and the money was not returned.

What started as hope quickly turned into a prolonged series of delays, excuses, and disappointments. The 14-day promise stretched into "another week and another week," while the Atias couple remained left hanging, facing worried parents and a fragile number of children. The contractor's problematic conduct went beyond the boundaries of logistical inconvenience and caused real and immediate reputational and financial damage to the kindergarten. Potential parents who came to see the place naturally asked about protection solutions — a critical question for every parent in Israel during wartime.

Rivka describes the helplessness and frustration she had to deal with day after day. "There were plenty of parents who came to see the kindergarten, asked me about the protective unit, and I said yes, we ordered it, he said it's coming soon," she recalls, adding the most painful bottom line: "And there were those who did not sign up because there is no protective unit." Every such refusal by parents represents not only a loss of income but also a deep blow to the trust and reputation that the couple worked hard to build, as they remained trapped between the contractor's promises and their responsibility for the children's safety.

At the center of the evasive conduct is the contractor, Tzahi. In a recorded phone call with Netanel, he tries to deflect the claims against him while attempting to project reliability. "I am not a person who, God forbid, ever in my life touched an agora that is not mine or ever took something that is not mine," he is heard saying, but immediately after that, he tries to normalize the situation and disclaim personal responsibility: "In work, especially in our field, things happen. Contractors delay the delivery of apartments by half a year and a year, it happens."

Israel Police response: "Upon receipt of the complaint by the police, an investigation was opened, during which a variety of actions are being carried out with the aim of reaching the truth and bringing the involved parties to justice. In this context, the suspect in the act was questioned. The investigation is still ongoing."

Abraham Shaltiel's response: "A friend asked me to assist two kindergartens, I gave an overview of the options existing in the market, including during the war. I did not act as a mediator, did not demand payment, and was not a party to the transaction, I only connected the parties and helped reach a good price. Despite Netanel's conduct towards me, I continued to try to assist and I hope the story will end soon. I share this difficulty, and I truly hope that the things presented in the interview will not lead to clarifying matters in court and to compensation that they will have to pay."

Tzahi the contractor's response: "There was a request from them to receive a MAMAD (protected room), and unfortunately we did not meet the timelines due to a delay at the manufacturer. In a conversation with the client, we committed to transferring the payment back, and yesterday I also informed him that the payment would be transferred to him. The client decided to cancel the order while the product is ready, which causes us losses and financing costs — nevertheless, it was decided to transfer the payment to the client."