Who would not like to buy a car, return it after four years and get back the down payment and all the installments from the financing car bank? Especially if the vehicle is a diesel whose value has fallen so much in recent years due to the exhaust gas scandal? There should be something like that. The financial expert Roland Klaus of the interest group (IG) revocation even assumes that “millions of Germans” can proceed with the so-called contradiction joker against their contracts, which consumers have used so far mainly in mortgage lending.

Reason are each form error. For example, courts have ruled in some cases that the terms of the contract are misunderstood, the nature of the loan is not mentioned, the wrong regulator is listed, and the procedures are incomplete upon termination. According to Klaus, the Mercedes-Benz bank had to take back a Mercedes C220 CDI and reimburse the customer for the down payment and the installments, because the contract states: “For the period between payment and repayment, full payment per day will result in an interest amount of 0.00 euros to pay. “Before that, however, there should be talk of a borrowing rate of 4.17 percent.

Many contracts are flawed

Many contracts are flawed

The lending and leasing contracts of almost all automotive banks are flawed, informed the Stiftung Warentest on its website. Six regional courts have already stated this. “Contracts are hellishly complicated,” says consumer advocate Christoph Herrmann the mistakes. “In addition, they are in some contradiction with the simplest possible contracts, the company’s marketing desires.”

However, the auto banks see this differently. “The vast majority of proceedings before German courts is in favor of VW Bank and its branches, the ratio is 9: 1 in the first instance,” writes VW Financial Services on request. In addition, the VW Bank has so far not lost legal proceedings. On the other hand, “the advertisement of alleged consumer advocates is interest-driven and dubious”.

The Mercedes Bank also considers the “allegations unfounded”. “In the two or three cases that were decided against us, we appealed,” says one employee. The contracts are fully in line with the legal situation. However, there have been comparisons between the Mercedes-Bank and customers, the institute admits. In comparisons, the defendant usually either wants to get rid of the state of affairs in which he gives in, or he himself sees a guilt or complicity.

For the lawyer Christian Nordholtz from Hanover can be “with any case and trial” earn money, no matter how high the opportunity for the plaintiff. Kira Melzer of the Schutzgemeinschaft für Bankkunden recommends an individual approach only if there is a legal protection insurance.

The revocation reveals that in each case car owners could have the facts of “experienced lawyers” examined free of charge and without obligation. Anyone who has legal expenses insurance could then take the legal route risk-free. A German provider of legal expenses insurance even offer the conclusion of a policy, if the legal dispute is imminent, says Klaus.

Consumer advocate Herrmann warns, however, that it must be a special traffic protection insurance. Also, the procedure for older cars is not necessarily profitable, because courts usually demanded a compensation for the use of the kilometers driven and the authorization from the owner and on the free market often more money could be achieved. At the latest then, driving for free is just a dream.

Many vehicle owners do not want to resign themselves to the depreciation of values, software updates and driving bans and join a pattern-finding suit (see adjacent message). From this step advises Roland Klaus of the IG revocation, however. “It involves multiple instances and can take years. But you want to get rid of your diesel as fast as possible. “

Consumer advocate Christoph Hermann considers a revocation before a designation claim to be important in order to be credible. “That would be the case if you participate in the designation suit and document that you are taking chances, but not revoking your own contract. That can then fall on your feet later, “he says. Even in the case of a successful lawsuit own claims could then be forfeited.

Impermissible switch-off device

Impermissible switch-off device

Daimler is fighting on many legal fronts. Thus, the Stuttgart Regional Court has sentenced the automaker in last week in three cases to pay damages between 25 000 and 40 000 €. The reduction of nitrogen oxide emissions at low outside temperatures is an inadmissible defeat device, it says in the court decision. Now more complaints could follow. The judgments are not yet final, the Daimler Group wants to appeal. vt