Question: I ordered a new sheitel from a sheitel macher. When I went to pick it up I saw that it was not what I had ordered. The sheitel macher agreed, but said she will fix it to match my order. In order to do so she will have to take out some of the hairs and replace them with different hairs. I was told that changing the hairs will not affect the quality of the sheitel. Nevertheless, I want to back out of the entire order since she already got it wrong once. Must I take the repaired sheitel?
Answer: There is a similar but different case which is discussed in Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpot 232, 5). The basis of the case in the Shulchan Aruch is a responsum of the Rosh (96, 6). In the case of the Rosh both the seller and buyer lived in one place but were familiar with a house located in a different city which the buyer purchased from the seller. Before the customer took possession, he found out that goyim had squatted in the house and broke windows and sullied the walls. The customer asked that the sale be canceled but the seller replied that he’ll repair the damages. They asked the Rosh whether the customer had the right to cancel the sale.
The Rosh ruled that since, even after the goyim damaged the house, it was still qualified to be called a house the seller was justified in claiming that he can repair the damage and the sale remains in force.
A similar question (again the issue was the sale of a house) was posed to the Ri Migash (Responsum 51). The Ri Migash ruled that if there was nothing wrong with the actual house, the seller could rectify the external issues and the sale remains in force. Only if it was necessary to replace an essential part of the house could the customer cancel the sale. The reason why he could cancel the sale in that case is because the part which needed to be installed was not part of the original sale. Therefore, the customer could argue that he didn’t buy the house with the new part, which was an essential part of the house, and he could refuse to accept the repaired house.
All the above is correct in the case where the customer bought a specific object, as he did in the cases of the Ri Migash and Rosh, since the argument of the seller is that the customer is getting the specific object which he originally bought. In your case, you didn’t buy a specific sheitel since the sheitel macher just took an order from you to produce a sheitel. Essentially, your claim is that she never produced the sheitel you had ordered. Therefore, even according to your claim, she can still complete your order. The fact that she wishes to give you the sheitel she originally produced for you and just change some hair is not an issue since the quality of the sheitel is not affected by the change of hair.
