BGH declares fee clause in Riester contracts invalid
Millions of Riester contracts have been taken out to prevent poverty in old age. However, the model is more than controversial. Especially because of the horrendous costs for savers. However, not all fees may be charged, as the Federal Court of Justice has ruled.
Following a new ruling by the Federal Court of Justice (BGH), many Riester savers can hope for a slightly higher payout: The judges in Karlsruhe declared an agreement used by savings banks invalid on Tuesday. The contracts stated that the customer "may have to pay acquisition and/or brokerage costs" if a life annuity was agreed after the savings phase (case reference: XI ZR 290/22).
The Federal Court of Justice ruled that this was not clear enough and therefore violated the transparency requirement. Consumers must be able to recognize what burdens they will face when concluding the contract, emphasized the presiding judge Jürgen Ellenberger during the hearing.
A savings phase and a payout phase
Riester pension contracts have an accumulation phase and a payout phase. Savers can decide whether they want a monthly pension for the rest of their lives, known as a life annuity, or whether part of the money should be paid out immediately.
The specific case concerned Riester bank savings plans taken out with Sparkasse Günzburg-Krumbach in Bavaria. The Baden-Württemberg consumer advice center had taken action against the bank and other savings banks that had such clauses in their Riester contracts called "Vorsorge Plus". However, only the Bavarian case went all the way to the Federal Court of Justice.
Since 2019, more and more customers have turned to the consumer advice center for help, reported Niels Nauhauser, Head of the Pension Provision, Banks and Loans department. According to the consumer advice center, savings banks are no longer allowed to charge a fee in cases like the one decided in Karlsruhe.
Riester pension has long been criticized
The consumer advice center estimates that 700,000 to 800,000 savers are affected by the ruling. It is not just about savings banks, but also about Volksbanken and Raiffeisenbanken, said Nauhauser. Although these contracts are more consumer-friendly, as acquisition and sales costs are excluded, administrative costs prior to payment are not.
The Riester pension, which was introduced in 2002, has long been criticized, among other things because high fees and the long period of low interest rates have reduced returns. Back in April, the Federation of German Consumer Organizations (vzbv) criticized the costs that providers charge at the start of payout.
Those who "riester" are supposed to be able to save money for old age with the support of state subsidies. According to current figures from the Federal Ministry of Labor, there are currently just under 16 million Riester contracts. It is estimated that a fifth to just under a quarter of these are dormant, i.e. not currently being saved for.
- Many consumers seeking retirement provision turned to the consumer advice center since 2019, concerned about fees in their Riester contracts, following the ruling of the Federal Court of Justice.
- The Federal Court of Justice considered the fee clause in Riester pension insurance contracts, specifically in Savings Bank savings plans, as not transparent enough, violating consumer protection laws.
- As an advisor, you might suggest alternatives to private pension provision for consumers who are concerned about the transparency and costs associated with Riester pension contracts.
- The judgments made by the Federal Court of Justice have significant implications for pension insurance providers, such as savings banks and Volksbanken, regarding consumer protection and legal issues.
- Consumer centers can play a crucial role in advocating for the rights of consumers in pension matters, ensuring they fully understand the terms and conditions of their pension contracts.
- The Riester pension insurance has faced criticism over the years, with concerns about high fees, long periods of low interest rates, and the number of inactive contracts, affecting the retirement provision of millions of consumers.
Source: www.ntv.de
