The battle of the consumer protection against the commission calculation of building societies is about the decision. The Bundesgerichtshof (BGH) negotiates tomorrow on whether the transaction fee is legal for savings plans. Perhaps the supreme civil court cases already on the same day the verdict.
Consumer Center North Rhine-Westphalia does still hope to get through its action in Karlsruhe, but it has so far lost in all the courts below.
The Schwäbisch Hall as a defendant in the test case is, accordingly optimistic. Nevertheless, one feels there is a certain nervousness, because a defeat would be a key point of the business model at stake (Az XI ZR 3 / 10).
read in the announcement of the date the Supreme Court as follows: "In view of the fact that the collection of statutory fees in the building society sector is a common practice, the result of the case is of great economic significance." What is it about? The consumer advocates hold the termination fee was illegal. They rely on an earlier decision of the Supreme Court, arguing that building societies would offer new customers for no benefit, but simply rolled down their distribution costs.
And add up. The final fee is usually a percentage of the savings and is called Commission for the placement of the first savings payments deducted. With an average savings target of 33 000 € 330 € so the customer pays. This year the industry sold contracts with an estimated contract sum of 93 billion euros, so that the commissions are likely to add up to almost one billion euros per year, because some providers charge a little more than one percent.
commission as an admission
the building societies argue that fee was the "entry fee to the building society group." For building savings is a closed system, save where the customer, irrespective of capital market and repay later, her building society loans. The system is also on the constant influx of new customers need. Therefore, the recruitment of new customers was in the interest of every building society. This also resembles the Federal Financial Supervisory Authority (BaFin).
The Düsseldorf consumer advocates have been complaining for two years against the industry and have chosen for your test cases in addition to the market leaders in Schwäbisch Hall, the Home Loan West Minster and the German ring building society in Hamburg. "We hope to have opportunities," says Mark Feck, lawyer of the Consumer Bank NRW. "The courts have not said that we are with our argument on the wrong track. In considering the building societies were but so far the advantage."
Source: Adopted WirtschaftsWoche
0 comments:
Post a Comment