Real estate loans: Avoid, reduce or recover early repayment penalties

Any­one who wants to or has to re­pay their real es­tate con­sumer loan with a fixed bor­row­ing rate (real es­tate loan for short) to the bank be­fore the agreed end of the in­terest period must ex­pect the bank to de­mand pay­ment of an early re­pay­ment pen­alty. The reason for this is that the bank loses in­terest due to the early re­pay­ment, which it would have re­ceived if the loan had not been re­paid un­til the agreed date. The bank is at­tempt­ing to ob­tain com­pens­a­tion for the loss and profit it has in­curred through the re­quired pre­pay­ment pen­alty (also known as an early re­pay­ment fee or charge).

The de­man­ded early re­pay­ment fees are still very high, av­er­aging around 10 per­cent of the re­main­ing cap­ital, ac­cord­ing to a study pub­lished in Novem­ber 2019 by the mar­ket watch­dog team of the con­sumer cen­ter Bre­men. It makes many bor­row­ers shy away from res­chedul­ing their old, high-​interest real es­tate loans – des­pite (or be­cause of) the cur­rent ex­tremely low in­terest rate level.

After the com­pu­ta­tions of the con­sumer ad­voc­ate were too high in three of four of the ex­amined cases (77 per cent) the pre­pay­ment pen­al­ties de­man­ded by the banks. The de­term­ined dif­fer­ence between the pre­pay­ment pen­al­ties de­man­ded by the credit in­sti­tu­tions and those cal­cu­lated by the con­sumer cen­ter amoun­ted to an av­er­age of 5 per­cent in fa­vor of the borrowers.

No mat­ter for what reason you want to ter­min­ate the con­tract early, the ques­tion al­ways arises whether you have to pay an early re­pay­ment pen­alty charged by the bank. How­ever, as a con­sumer, you do not have to ac­cept any de­mand from the bank without a second thought, be­cause the pre­pay­ment pen­alty of­ten turns out to be un­jus­ti­fied or much too high!

For all real es­tate loan agree­ments that were con­cluded between June 2010 and today, there are ba­sic­ally two op­tions that can be used to ward off the bank’s claim. Which one comes into con­sid­er­a­tion for you de­pends on your spe­cific in­di­vidual case.

Avoiding or recovering early repayment penalties through revocation

First of all, it is ob­vi­ous to check the re­voc­a­tion op­tions of the real es­tate loan. In more than half of all loan agree­ments con­cluded after June 11, 2010, there are in­cor­rect re­voc­a­tion in­struc­tions or in­cor­rect or in­com­plete man­dat­ory in­form­a­tion re­quired by law (e.g., if the con­sumer was not prop­erly in­formed of his or her right of re­voc­a­tion). The courts have so far iden­ti­fied more than 400 in­cor­rect for­mu­la­tions in the re­voc­a­tion instructions.

If your loan agree­ment also con­tains such er­rors, the agree­ment can be re­voked and un­wound – even years after it was con­cluded. In the case of real es­tate loans, there is gen­er­ally a right of re­voc­a­tion of 14 days, provided that the re­voc­a­tion in­form­a­tion is cor­rect. If, on the other hand, the bor­rower was in­cor­rectly in­formed, he can still re­voke his con­tract bey­ond this period.

For real es­tate loan agree­ments con­cluded since March 21, 2016, how­ever, there is a re­stric­tion: Even in the case of in­cor­rect re­voc­a­tion in­form­a­tion, the re­voc­a­tion can only be de­clared ret­ro­act­ively for twelve months plus 14 days (the reg­u­lar re­voc­a­tion period)! The reason for this is the spe­cial stat­utory pro­vi­sion for real es­tate con­sumer loan agree­ments of the Ger­man Civil Code (Sec­tion 356b (2) BGB).

The suc­cess­ful re­voc­a­tion of a con­tract has the con­sequence that it is treated as if it had never ex­is­ted. This in turn means that the bor­rower does not have to pay any early re­pay­ment pen­alty or can re­cover any early re­pay­ment pen­alty already paid: If no con­tract ex­ists, lo­gic­ally no com­pens­a­tion can be claimed.

How­ever, this solu­tion is of­ten not pos­sible: Some­times a re­voc­a­tion is no longer pos­sible in terms of time, some­times the re­voc­a­tion was cor­rectly in­struc­ted or the com­plete re­versal of the con­tract proves to be un­eco­nom­ical due to the refinancing.

But even in cases where re­voc­a­tion is not (or no longer) pos­sible, the early re­pay­ment pen­alty can usu­ally be sig­ni­fic­antly re­duced and of­ten even com­pletely avoided.

The ini­tial con­sulta­tion with us is free of charge. Please feel free to con­tact us directly.

How to reach us

Schirp & Part­ner Recht­san­wälte mbB
Leipzi­ger Platz 9
10117 Ber­lin, Germany

Phone: +49 (0)30 – 327 617 0
Fax: +49 (0)30 – 327 617 17
E-​Mail: mail@​schirp.​com

Legal Advisory Label

Please take note that we can not answer consultatively here. If you happen to request that anyways, you may give us full power of attorney. For that, simply download this form, sign it and return it to us.

News

WIRECARD: MUNICH REGIONAL COURT INITIATES MODEL PROCEEDINGS

The de­cision of the Mu­nich I Re­gional Court was pub­lished in the Fed­eral Gaz­ette on March 16, 2022.

Munich Public Prosecutor’s Office I brings charges against ex-​Wirecard CEO

This has now been con­firmed by the pub­lic prosecutor’s of­fice in a press release.

Einladung zum Webinar für Anleger – Vermögensarreste durch die Staatsanwaltschaft Oldenburg bei den Deutsche Lichtmiete

Am 3. März 2022 hat die Staat­san­waltschaft Olden­burg über das Ver­mö­gen zahlreicher Deutsche Licht­mi­ete Gesell­schaften Ver­mö­gensar­reste ver­hängt und alle An­leger der be­t­ro­f­fenen Gesell­schaften aufge­fordert, sich bei der Staat­san­waltschaft Olden­burg unter dem Ak­ten­zeichen 11B AR 100359/21 als so­genan­nte Tatver­let­zte zu melden und mitzuteilen, ob und in welcher Höhe sie einen An­s­pruch auf Er­satz gel­tend machen. Die […]

Aktionsbund Leistungsbilanz 2015

Der Ak­tions­bund Akt­iver An­leger­s­chutz e.V. ist seit 13 Jahren im An­leger­s­chutz un­ter­wegs. Was der AAA in dieser Zeit un­ter­nom­men und er­reicht hat, ist nun er­st­mals in einer Leis­tungs­b­il­anz dok­u­mentiert! Quelle: Aktionsbund

AAA gegen XI. BGH-​Senat – Brief an die Präsidentin des BGH

Vor et­was mehr als einem Jahr hat der XI. Zivilsenat des BGH mit einer über­ras­chenden Entscheidung die Recht­s­prechung der let­zten Jahrzehnte zur Prospek­thaf­tung bei geschlossenen Fonds auf den Kopf ges­tellt und damit dem An­leger­s­chutz einen bru­talen Sch­lag ver­setzt. Seit­dem hat er mit weit­eren Entscheidun­gun­gen mehrmals nachgetre­ten. Zun­ehmend mehr Land- und Ober­landes­gerichte fol­gen der Auffas­sung des […]

Direktinvestments bei der Deutsche Lichtmiete

Bei der Deutsche Licht­mi­ete er­mit­telt die Staat­san­waltschaft, bei ver­schiedenen ihrer Gesell­schaften wurde das vorläufige In­solv­en­zver­fahren er­öffnet. Die An­leger er­hal­ten jetzt An­ge­bote, sich kos­ten­pf­lichtig bei der An­mel­dung von For­der­ungen ver­tre­ten zu lassen. Außer­dem sol­len sie schon mal ein Prozent ihrer An­lage­summe an die THD Treuhand­de­pot GmbH zah­len, damit diese für sie tätig wird. Die An­leger haben […]

All Announcements »

Copyright © Schirp & Partner Solicitors | Legal Notice | Privacy Statement
Zum Seitenanfang