| Reading time: 2 minutes
Targobank omitted from now on minimum wage
Bbanks are allowed to demand for the short-term Overdraft of the current account over the overdraft, no minimum charges, if you are otherwise only minimal interest profits apply. The Federal court of justice (BGH) decided. Thus, consumer advocates prevailed against Deutsche Bank and Targobank. Their business models to disadvantaged customers “inappropriate”, – stated in the judgment. (Az. XI ZR 9/15 and XI ZR 387/15)
The German Bank was required to suit the date of overdraft interest in the amount of 16.5 percent, and currently stands at 14.9 per cent. The customer but have to pay according to the small print in the agreement an overdraft fee of at least 6.90 euros in the quarter, if the Profit of the Bank with the interest is below this amount. In the case of higher interest rate receivables this fee is not payable.
The Targobank had set the appropriate fee for the action date to 2.95 euros a month. Here, too, should interest rates have not been billed, if the amount of 2,95 Euro per month.
The Supreme court explained the minimum charges now inadmissible. If banks allowed the Overdraft of an account granted to you, the customer, a credit. The price is according to the “legal principles” an interest rate, and thus a duration-dependent payment, the banks have their processing effort to press iron.
The Federal court referred to a computational example, to the fact that Bank customers would pay at a low Overdraft for a few days with the fee unreasonably high interest rates. In the case of Targobank, the fee of 2.95 Euro for an Overdraft of ten euros for a day on the year corresponded to expected an interest rate of 10.767,5 percent, and the fee of the German Bank of 6,90 Euro of 25,000 percent.
The Targobank said immediately after the sentencing, “to waive” the fee. “The legitimate demands of our customers in respect of already paid fees” to meet the Bank now”, of course, immediately”.
Against the Targobank had complained to the consumer advice centre of North Rhine-Westphalia against Deutsche Bank, the verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband (vzbv). “The judgment only to the customers of the two banks is not going to benefit,” stressed the Verbraucherzentrale NRW. “The appropriate contract clause is invalid if it contains a disproportionately high interest rates or fees, and Bank customers will be asked with drastic amounts to the Fund.”
Affected Bank customers could now demand back already paid the minimum fees, said the consumer Association of NRW. You put on your website a relevant sample letter is available.