CONTACT FOEN ONLY: BGH decides on repayment claims!

CONTACT FOEN ONLY: BGH decides on repayment claims!

A storm of indignation brews itself! Consumers who pay account management fees for their checking account are facing a crucial moment. The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) in Karlsruhe again deals with the inadmissible fees that banks and savings banks have collected without the consent of the customers. This time it is about the question of how far reimbursement claims go back and how high they could be. A judgment could have far -reaching consequences for millions of account doors!

The problem is clear: banks may only increase fees with active approval from customers. But in the past, many banks simply raised the fees without obtaining approval. As early as 2021, the BGH had declared the so -called approval fiction clause ineffective, which gave many consumers the opportunity to reclaim too much paid fees. But what about the demands that go back to three years? This question is now being negotiated in Karlsruhe, and the outcome is uncertain.

The case before the BGH

The focus is on a man's complaint against his savings bank, which has levied fees without his consent since 2018. After submitting an objection in 2021, he called for the repayment of the fees for the period from 2018 to 2021. However, the Ingolstadt district court rejected his claim because he had only reacted after three years. Now it is due to the BGH to decide whether the man is entitled to repayment and whether the three -year regulation is also applicable to checking account contracts.

The effects could be enormous! Despite the consumer -friendly judgment of 2021, only a few customers have asserted their claims. A survey shows that only 11 percent of customers recovered money, although in 40 percent of the accounts the fees had increased in the three years before the judgment. Oliver Maier von Verivox warns: "The banks will be able to keep the lion's share of their illegally collected account fees." A judgment could not only be of great importance for the plaintiff, but for many consumers!