Skimping on Refunds: Few Bank Customers Demand Unwarranted Account Fees
Request for Illegal Fee Refunds by Some Bank Clients - Some bank clients demanded reimbursement for illegitimate charges they incurred.
Let's get straight to it! Since the pro-consumer landmark decision of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) on invalid account fees clauses, a minority of bank clients have sought restitution from their financial institutions. A representative study by comparison portal Verivox sheds light on this, with only 11% of respondents filing claims.
Following the BGH ruling in April 2021, consent fiction clauses, which had been common in banks' general terms and conditions, were deemed unenforceable. These clauses equated silence or inaction within a specified timeframe with consent to a change in account fees. As a result, numerous clients potentially had grounds for claiming back unjustly imposed fees.
Up to 40% of clients may have had the chance
"Based on past research, around 40% of customers saw an increase in checking account fees over a span of three years prior to the ruling," remarks Oliver Maier, CEO of Verivox. "Despite debated claim expiration periods, at least all these clients could have sought reimbursements." Interestingly, the data suggests that no bank was able to secure the required customer consent before the Karlsruhe ruling.
In Verivox's study conducted in the summer of 2021, 82% of surveyed individuals stated they would press for refunds if they were entitled to them. However, the latest findings paint an intriguing picture. Four out of ten respondents were oblivious to the court ruling, while even among those informed about the Karlsruhe decision, 80% refrained from seeking refunds.
So, why aren't people asking for their money back?
- 34% decided against refunds as they felt they had no legitimate claim.
- 23% found the process overly complex.
- 21% were uncertain whether the ruling applied to them.
- 14% deemed the inconvenience not worth the relatively small sums involved.
- 7% were fearful that their accounts may be closed or that the relationship with their bank could be negatively impacted.
The BGH is currently reviewing a case regarding Berlin Sparkasse's return of improperly collected fees. This case will also address when claim timelines expire, but a verdict for Tuesday is uncertain.
- Federal Court of Justice
- Account fee
- Bank customer
- Verivox
- Karlsruhe
Behind the Scenes:
While many factors contribute to the low claims rate, a considerable portion of customers remain in the dark about the ruling. In addition, the perceived complexity of the process, limited financial incentives, and general trust in banks may play a part. Legal and technical hurdles may also deter customers from seeking reimbursement.
- Despite the Federal Court of Justice's ruling that made it possible for many bank customers to claim back unwarranted account fees, only 11% of respondents in a study by Verivox filed claims, with 40% of them potentially having grounds for reimbursements.
- The complexity of the process, limited financial incentives, uncertainty about the ruling's applicability, and concerns about potential inconvenience or negative impact on their relationship with their bank could be why some bank customers refrain from asking for their money back.
