Getting out of a real estate loan early can be expensive.
Consumer advocates consider the sums to be too high in many cases.
A decision by the Federal Court of Justice could now turn things around.
Frankfurt / Karlsruhe - When canceling home financing, consumers often have to pay a lot of money to their bank - too much, as lawyers and consumer advocates believe.
They also accuse financial institutions of not providing transparent information about the calculation of the so-called early repayment penalty.
According to the critics, a current decision by the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) strengthens the position of the borrower.
The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) rejected Commerzbank's non-admission complaint against a judgment of the Frankfurt Higher Regional Court (OLG) from July last year (Az .: XI ZR 320/20).
"The Federal Court of Justice actually follows the decision of the Higher Regional Court Frankfurt am Main and considers further clarification of the matter to be unnecessary," explained lawyer Marko Huth from the Berlin law firm Gansel, who won the OLG ruling against Commerzbank.
In the specific case, the borrower should pay more than 21,500 euros to Commerzbank to replace two loans. Put simply, with such compensation, financial institutions secure compensation for the fact that they lose interest income in the event of early termination of a loan agreement. Borrowers can often save considerable money in the medium and long term by rescheduling if they agree on more favorable terms in a new contract. Mortgage rates have tended to fall in recent years.
The Frankfurt Higher Regional Court came to the conclusion that the statements made by Commerzbank regarding the calculation of the compensation in the disputed loan agreement “did not meet the legal requirements”. The information should be "clear, concise, understandable and precise". The conclusion of the OLG as the second instance in these proceedings: “The early repayment penalty was paid without any legal reason. There was no payment obligation. "(Ref .: 17 U 810/19)
Commerzbank currently did not want to comment on the subject upon request. After the OLG decision last summer, the institute had announced: “Against the background of the latest case law of the BGH on the requirements for the presentation of the calculation method for early repayment penalties, according to which only the description of the essential parameters is required in broad outline, the view of the In our opinion, OLG Frankfurt is not convincing.
The ruling, which has now been confirmed by the BGH, is also important for customers of other banks, said lawyer Huth. Some institutes have revised forms, but these too are "still open to attack in some cases". For many private individuals there is the option of avoiding a prepayment penalty. This applies to contracts from March 22, 2016. At the time, the legislature stipulated that banks must clearly instruct their customers about this compensation, especially when it comes to construction financing.
"Even according to our observations, many banks and savings banks do not meet the statutory information requirements regarding the calculation of a prepayment penalty, which have been in effect since March 22, 2016," said consumer advocate Niels Nauhauser on Monday. "The errors vary widely, but the legal consequence means that the borrower does not have to pay any prepayment penalty or can even claim it back."
The banking expert from the Baden-Württemberg consumer center affirmed: "The current statutory regulation on early repayment penalties secures the banks the full profit margin, while the risks of failed financing are passed on to consumers." It is all the more gratifying that court decisions have considerably improved the legal position for consumers. “We therefore advise those affected to defend themselves against the early repayment penalty and to have the clause for calculating the early repayment penalty in contracts legally checked from March 22, 2016,” said Nauhauser.
The Frankfurt Higher Regional Court held that a bank had the right to demand “an appropriate early repayment penalty for the damage directly related to the early repayment”. However, this claim is "excluded if, among other things, the information on the calculation of the early repayment penalty in the contract is insufficient". dpa
