Approval of fees: Many customers ignore bank requests

A survey by tagesschau.de According to many bank customers have not yet agreed to the new fees – despite deadlines and, in some cases, termination threats. How do the financial institutions react? What can the affected customers expect?

Even eight months later, the judgment of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH), according to which bank customers must expressly agree to a change in the General Terms and Conditions (GTC), causes a dispute. A survey by tagesschau.de among the leading German banks and savings banks has shown that a considerable number of customers have not yet agreed to the changed contractual conditions.

It is said of the Hamburger Sparkasse (Haspa), the largest German savings bank in terms of total assets, that by the end of 2021 “more than half of the customers” have agreed to the changed contractual conditions. Conversely, this means that several hundred thousand of the institute’s 1.5 million customers have not yet sent any feedback. A considerable number – yet Haspa is calm.

Deutsche Bank threatens to be terminated

“Every customer has time to calmly take a look at the new contractual relationships. As we know that this is a complex issue, our employees in our branches are happy to help in person on site or by telephone,” writes Haspa in a helpless sounding appeal. The question of a possible termination therefore does not currently arise. The Sparkasse is so conciliatory and wants to continue to woo the customers.

Deutsche Bank is much more decisive. A spokesman said at the request of tagesschau.de, that more than 85 percent of the customers of Deutsche Bank, Postbank and norisbank have already agreed to the changed prices and conditions. “At the same time, we have again written to the customers who have not yet consented for various reasons, reminding them of how important it is for the customer relationship to expressly agree to the known prices and conditions,” said the spokesman – and immediately added a threat : Anyone who refuses to do so risks an “examination of the customer relationship”. In plain language, a termination is not excluded.

Commerzbank, the second largest German private bank, does not want to go that far. She initially wants to continue to solicit customer approval. “The point is to make the contractual basis with our customers legally secure. We therefore need the approval of the current conditions and prices,” said a spokesman tagesschau.de. Commerzbank does not want to say how high the proportion of customers is who have not yet consented to the contractual changes. Only this much: “We are very satisfied with the number of feedbacks so far. The customers understand that this is a legal requirement,” said the spokesman.

Just don’t lose customers

First of all, ING also wants to continue to campaign for approval. With a good nine million customers, it is the third largest private customer bank in Germany. The deadline for approving the changed contractual conditions runs until the end of February. So no need to be pessimistic. The bank does not want to give any figures on the amount of approvals received so far. “Our goal is, however, that as many customers as possible agree to the terms and conditions,” said a spokesman. “To this end, we will continue to concentrate on the current approval process and make it as simple and digital as possible”.

The fact that the institutes are obviously trying not to lose customers is not surprising, given that the competition in the German banking market is fiercer than in any other country in Europe. Additionally, there are still money houses that offer free bank accounts that disgruntled customers could switch to. The banks do not want to take back their price increases either, because the zero interest rate policy of the European Central Bank, which has persisted for years, makes it difficult for them to earn money, especially in the low-margin private customer business. So the institutes initially have no choice but to continue to entangle their customers.

Creative formulations

In addition, the legal departments of some institutes have developed surprising creativity. For example, the Berlin law firm Gansel Rechtsanwälte reported on a letter from Commerzbank to its customers, in which it claims that consent to the new terms and conditions does not change the prices and conditions communicated. Strictly speaking, this is correct, because the prices are communicated and nobody can change that afterwards, said a spokesman for the “FAZ”. What matters, however, is what Commerzbank is hiding: “The prices communicated have not yet been agreed because the customer has not agreed to them.” Only the approval will lead to the fact that the prices that have only been communicated so far actually apply, and that is exactly what the bank is doing. The law firm therefore describes the Commerzbank letter as “a particularly bold attempt” to get the customer’s approval by suggesting that nothing will change anyway.

In the opinion of Hypovereinsbank, in addition to written consent to changed contractual conditions, “implied action” by the customer can also be interpreted as consent. This is the case if an account is still actively used after information about the adjustments.

Experts expect new lawsuits

According to experts, there are signs of a new dispute on this issue because the financial institutions will not be able to get all customers to agree. If a customer refuses to accept the changes or does not react to them, the banks must take action according to the BGH ruling. This could lead to new legal disputes. “If bank customers refuse their consent, they do not have to pay the new fees,” explains the law firm Gansel. However, the bank may then be entitled to terminate the giro contract. According to the experts, it has not yet been legally clarified whether this right of termination actually exists.

The banks are much more cautious about the question of the reimbursement of inadmissibly levied bank fees due to the BGH ruling. “Please understand that we do not provide any information on the previous reimbursement costs, but we have set up provisions of 99 million euros,” writes Commerzbank in a statement. Deutsche Bank sees charges totaling around 300 million euros as a result of the BGH fee ruling.

ING speaks of “controllable economic effects” but does not provide any figures. Haspa assures that “demonstrably justified claims” for fee reimbursements will of course be met. The first reimbursements have already been made. However, the prices have only been adjusted for two products in the last three years. Overall, Haspa has so far only received very few reclaims.