In the dispute over insufficient interest paid on premium savings contracts, the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) has once again strengthened consumers. The judges declared interest clauses in the savings contracts of the Sparkassen Zwickau and Erzgebirge to be invalid. The money houses will now probably have to recalculate the interest. The customers can therefore partly hope for high back payments. The consumer association Saxony had sued. Almost 3,000 savers took part in the two model declaratory actions. This involved additional claims averaging more than 5000 euros.
Within a few weeks, the Saxon consumer advocates won two further judgments in favor of consumers before the BGH. At the beginning of October, the highest civil judge had decided similarly in the case of the Sparkasse Leipzig.
What is the dispute about?
Premium savings contracts were sold millions of times between 1990 and 2010 by savings banks and Volksbanks. In addition to a fixed premium, savers receive variable interest on their savings. In the low interest rate phase, however, the institutes lowered the interest rate on their own initiative. As a result, customers may not have received enough income. The judges therefore stipulated that the savings banks must use a uniform interest rate from the Bundesbank for long-term investments for the calculation.
Which that is must now be clarified by the lower court – in the case of the Saxon savings banks, the Dresden Higher Regional Court. Affected savers therefore need “continued patience and strong nerves” until this reference interest rate is fixed, according to the consumer advice center. Only then is it clear how much money the institutes have to pay back. Until then, further proceedings will probably end up before the BGH. Nationwide, consumer advice centers have initiated almost a dozen class actions relating to premium savings contracts.
Why are there so many procedures?
The consumer advocates want to prevent, among other things, that the claims of customers expire. The BGH stipulated in its rulings: The three-year period for the statute of limitations does not begin to run until the savings contract has ended. This means that the entire term of the contract must be included in the subsequent calculation of the interest.
At some institutes, however, time is of the essence. Some Saxon savings banks, for example, terminated a number of contracts in 2018. “We are therefore planning further model declaratory actions to inhibit the statute of limitations,” says Michael Hummel, legal expert at the consumer center in Saxony. With every further judgment before the BGH, the legal situation becomes clearer for consumers, says Hummel: “This makes it easier for the savers affected to enforce their claims.”
Who will benefit from the judgments?
The judgments directly help those consumers who have participated in the model declaratory actions. “You can invoke the judgment if you demand interest from the Sparkasse or if you therefore take it to court,” says Sebastian Reiling, who looks after model declaratory actions at the Federal Association of Consumers. Because even after a positive judgment, consumers have to assert their claims against the financial institution again. Not all savings banks give in. “There are institutes that refuse to pay back payments despite the BGH ruling,” says lawyer Hummel. Sparkasse Leipzig claims that the question of the reference interest rate has not yet been clarified. The BGH judgment therefore “does not lead to payment claims in individual cases”.
Nevertheless, the air is getting thinner for the savings banks – and not only for the institutes involved in the proceedings. Because the criteria that the judges have set for calculating the interest can be applied in many respects to contracts with other savings banks. This increases the chances of their premium savers to enforce back payments – also legally: “Other courts usually do not deviate from what the BGH stipulates,” says Sebastian Reiling. However, this is not a guarantee that individual financial institutions will give in in the interest rate dispute.
Are the judgments already showing any effect?
They are still too fresh for that. “So far we have not been able to determine any change in the behavior of the savings banks,” says Matthias Schmid, a lawyer at the Bavarian Consumer Center. However, some higher regional courts had already passed judgments in favor of consumers. These are definitely having an effect. “The amounts that the savings banks are willing to pay have risen,” says consumer lawyer Hummel. At the beginning of the dispute, the institutes often only offered ten percent of what the customers asked for. “We are now closer to 50 percent and more,” said Hummel. The Saxon consumer advocates have so far recalculated the interest for a good 6,000 contracts. On average, additional payments of 3500 euros came out.
The willingness of the institutes to pay varies, however. In Bavaria, for example, “the savings banks generally refuse to make any additional payments,” says Matthias Schmid. If they do make an offer, it is “not nearly what the savers are entitled to”. This is different in Baden-Württemberg: There, consumers “now receive additional payments from all institutes,” says Niels Nauhauser, financial expert at the consumer center. Financial institutions unwilling to pay have warned consumer advocates about inadmissible interest clauses – largely successfully. The additional claims are on average just under 2500 euros. “But only those who ask for it will get a second look,” says Niels Nauhauser. No savings bank pays by itself.
How do affected savers best proceed?
Anyone who wants to claim interest that has not been paid can have their contract checked for inadmissible clauses at the consumer advice centers. Many also offer one Recalculation of the interest at. With the result you should claim the interest from your financial institution. The calculation helps “to estimate how much you can demand and how a possible offer from the Sparkasse should be classified,” says financial expert Nauhauser.
If the offer is close to what you asked for, you can accept it, says consumer lawyer Michael Hummel. If, on the other hand, the Sparkasse takes a stand, the only option that remains is usually to go to court. “With the BGH judgment, however, the chances of being successful there have increased,” says Hummel. The experts advise consumers whose Sparkasse is running a sample assessment procedure to join. “This applies, for example, to the proceedings against the Sparkasse Nürnberg and the Stadtsparkasse Munich,” says lawyer Matthias Schmid. So far, around 4,800 savers have done that. The consumer advice center estimates the number of those affected at around 50,000.