Court Case Involving Bergfürst Crowdfunding

An in­vestor, rep­res­en­ted by at­tor­ney Dr. Schmidt-​Morsbach, who had pur­chased loan re­ceiv­ables from Bergfürst Ser­vice GmbH (now THV 1 Ber­lin GmbH) via the Bergfürst crowd­fund­ing plat­form, res­cin­ded the con­tract years later. She ar­gued that the can­cel­la­tion policy had been flawed. Since the agree­ment con­sti­tuted a fin­an­cial ser­vices con­tract, she con­ten­ded that can­cel­la­tion re­mained possible.

The Ber­lin Local Court ini­tially dis­missed her claim. On ap­peal be­fore the Ber­lin II Re­gional Court (March 2026), the presid­ing judge clas­si­fied the pur­chase of credit claims as a fin­an­cial ser­vice — a key factor for the legal assessment.

How­ever, whether the can­cel­la­tion policy was ac­tu­ally flawed re­mained un­re­solved: The com­pany against which the claims were made un­ex­pec­tedly paid the in­vestor the out­stand­ing amount be­fore this is­sue was decided.

You can find the Stif­tung War­entest art­icle on the topic “Risky In­vest­ments – Can­cel­la­tion May Be Pos­sible for a Long Time” here (Ger­man only).