Is the money that the husband received in return for his effort in completing a transaction for another person, which he described as "gratuities and expenses" without disclosing that it was a fee for him, lawful or unlawful, especially after the concerned person objected to the amount paid later?

The reality of the transactions can be summarized into two cases:

1. If the husband is known for performing this work for a wage: The agreement is considered a contract of ijara (leasing/hiring), and the husband is entitled to the customary and prevailing wage for such work, even if it was not explicitly agreed upon. In case of dispute, experts are consulted to determine the wage. This is supported by the statements of Ibn Qudamah and Ibn al-Qayyim, who assert that prevailing custom takes the place of explicit verbal agreement.

2. If the husband is not known for performing this work for a wage: The agreement is considered a contract of wakala (agency), and the husband is not entitled to demand a wage unless it was agreed upon, because he is not known for such work, and an agent does not take from the principal's money except with their permission. This is supported by a fatwa from the Permanent Committee for Scholarly Research and Ifta.

In both cases, the husband erred by informing the man of something other than the truth. He must adhere to honesty in his words and actions, as truthfulness is a cause of blessing, and lying obliterates it, as stated in the noble prophetic hadith: "If they are truthful and clarify, they will be blessed in their transaction, but if they conceal and lie, the blessing of their transaction will be effaced."