Before Christmas I accidentally placed a bid on a notebook that showed significant signs of use!
I still wanted to pay immediately via PayPal, which the seller urgently insists on! Since it didn't work either with direct debit or other PayPal payment (which in my opinion is the same in green?), I immediately apologized and offered an immediate transfer! The seller refused and insisted on a PayPal payment!
Then I got in touch with you in writing, i.e. On the PayPal service page. Then I was offered a service call.
Here it was said that you did not know exactly what this was and I should top up my PayPal account, but this payment would not be possible with this article?!
I didn't hear from this seller again. But suddenly I had a letter from Elite Inkasso in the mailbox, which added enough fees to me even though I didn't get a reminder or anything else!
I wanted one for Christmas, but this seems a bit strange to me now, and I think that this seller, even if it is a private person, is a defective item that he urgently wants to keep! I thought that was off the table!
Why didn't you just top up your PP account?
Is it about eBay or eBay Klein., Because you say "bid on an item".
It is also a misconception that reminders are required before a debt collection is initiated. This is possible if the delay is correctly indicated in writing in the invoice with the payment deadline. If the UK does not do this, it must issue a warning.
Collection fees are only to be paid here, which is also justified.
In the case of a debt collection, it is "a simple letter", i.e. 0.3 fee maximum. In turn, this means 15.00 euro collection fees + 3.00 euro expenses for an HF up to 500 euro.
But since a lot of information is missing, one can't answer whether the collection would be justified.
It's eBay.
Yes, but PayPal said that the article was no longer possible to pay because it was already marked!
Debt collection: simple writing
Amount 279.50 (shipping included)
Interest 1.22
Basic remuneration / flat-rate expenses 69.97
Total claim 350.68
I did not receive an invoice, so nothing was indicated…
Basic remuneration / flat-rate expenses 69.97
Maximum 15.00 collection fee + 3.00 euro expenses. Total: 18.00 euro.
Many Thanks!
Yes, I have already understood that, but what exactly is the rate calculated from, the rate of a lawyer or the invoice? Even though I've never seen a debt collection letter for 18.00 euro?!
But since I now suspect a defective item behind it, must there be a way to get out of this sales contract?
For a long time there were no "rules" on what a debt collection had to adhere to in terms of fees. Then there were sometimes several hundred euro collection fees for a 10 euro HF. At some point there was the rule that a debt collection, so that this Wild West manner comes to an end, can adhere to the only law that is realistic.
The Lawyers' Remuneration Act, RVG for short.
With the RVG, a lawyer measures his fee according to his activity & the RVG is very complex with all its additional articles, etc. A debt collection can & must be based on this.
Even though I've never seen a debt collection letter for 18.00 euro?!
Of course you don't & 99.9% of the time you never will. Why? Because a debt collection would then no longer earn anything.
However, the smallest rate of the RVG is a fee of 0.3.
This is the MINIMUM RATE that can be calculated for a simple type of writing. There are court or even judgments from the Federal Court of Justice.
Read more here:
https://www.infodienst-schuldnerberatung.de/bundesgerichtshof-fuer-masseninkasso-koennen-nur-kosten-in-hoehe-einer-03-fachen-rechtsanwaltsgebuehr-verlangt-werden/
And 99.9% of all collections are mass collections.
Your personal data is entered in the system, it only takes a few minutes & the system will then automatically send you a letter. Mass processing = mass collection.
A lawyer with a debt collection license, the best example: KSP lawyers - don't work differently! Nothing is checked manually, etc., they are only entitled to a 0.3 fee
A lawyer who has to write a document himself, individually for each debtor, you can ask for more, but here too only within the framework.
A debt collection will never sue for their fees.
There's no named judgment where a debt collection company has successfully sued its fees above 0.3. In the case of Infoscore, the court also legally awarded a maximum fee of 0.5!
https://www.infodienst-schuldnerberatung.de/inkassokosten-fuer-automatisiertes-inkassoverfahren-sind-nur-kosten-analog-einer-05fachen-gebuehr-nach-vv-rvg-zu-rechtfertigen/
But what was passed by the BGH before the new ruling. The BGH judgment is therefore to be taken as an authoritative reference. But there's also a somewhat older BGH ruling, which coincides with the ruling from March 2019 or is treated equally. The main thing is that a debt collection operates fake / genuine factoring & can only charge actual fees. At the end, "simple writing" again here> 0.3 fee.
Thanks again!
I already had the issue of debt collection in my head, that it wouldn't work that way, but how can I find it all quickly? Thanks
I still have one important question…
I had to rely on the eBay app because I couldn't log into the browser for a while. There it was somehow difficult to get in touch with the sellers as long as they hadn't got in touch!
At least before the recently released update!
A month later, the seller contacted me if I would still transfer money and a few hours later the debt collection letter was sent out!
That doesn't seem entirely right to me!
Isn't there any way to withdraw from the sales contract?
Isn't there any way to withdraw from the sales contract?
Not one-sided.
Another new problem! Sorry I missed it!
Can the obligee contractually agree a fee of 1.0 with the collection, which is then imposed on me? Plus post and telecommunications fees that he didn't even have!
Can the obligee contractually agree a fee of 1.0 with the collection, which is then imposed on me?
What is contractually agreed between the debt collection & the creditor does not matter to you as a debtor. Imposing on you does not bring much here if you know your rights or know that the collection can ultimately only demand 0.3 RVG.
The debt collection has already been paid for by the creditor.
The debt collection just wants to earn from you too.
Plus post and telecommunications fees that he didn't even have!
On the one hand, you always have to prove that fees have been incurred & on the other hand, if the collection has none, it may not charge any fees.
And thank you again!
That you took the time to help me and shed some light on the darkness of the legal jungle…
Always my pleasure.
Unfortunately it's getting more and more complex somehow…
Should I take action against the debt collection now, I can invoke a "simple letter".
But there's not a lack of agreement, in that the seller on a payment via PayPal inventory, which did not materialize despite an additional direct debit mandate. For technical or discretionary reasons on the part of PayPal?
And thus, in case of doubt, the contract is deemed not to be concluded?
Should I take action against the debt collection now, I can invoke a "simple letter".
The debt collection will answer you that they do not accept this and that you are in the right that you can ask for more than 0.3. That's a lie.
You should just pay the actual fees.
In other words, 15.00 euro collection fee, as a specific transfer.
This 70 euro collection fee will not get through in court.
Based on your statement: HF + interest + collection fees, you make an earmarked transfer.
e.g. File number // 15.00 collection fee 0.3 RVG + xx HF + xx interest
You can calculate the current daily interest rates here: https://www.zinsen-berechnen.de/verzugszinsrechner.php
At the top you carry the handler in, then since when you are in default and then when you pay. Below is the total interest since & how much interest per day will be added.
After you have transferred you write to the debt collection agency that you completely contradict the claim (this prevents a Schufa entry) and if they want their fictitious fees, they have to sue you.
Also write that you will object to any dunning notice and enforcement notice.
I always try to answer a lot of questions, but we're slowly moving in the direction of legal advice. I can't & may not offer you this.
A purchase contract is concluded when 2 declarations of intent have been submitted. Since this is about eBay (normal), a contract was created with the successful bid. Did the UK only offer PayPal or other payment methods?
If he has offered several, then he can't explicitly only insist on PayPal. Unless he has expressly pointed this out before the purchase or only offered PayPal as a method of payment.
Why the UK has no understanding to offer you a different method of payment… Is another matter. Strictly speaking, I also see a violation of the duty to mitigate damage here.
