律所要闻 / 重要主題
Consumer’s right of withdrawal: a trap for craftsman
Well-intentioned consumer protection rights regularly affect the innocent
In an article dated 14 September 2023, we addressed the issue Caution: The “craftsman withdrawal” business model and pointed out the risk faced by contractors who conclude contracts off-premises.
In the middle of this year, the courts once again dealt with this scenario (Federal Court of Justice, decision of 9 July 2025 VII ZR 227/23 – rejection of the appeal against non-admission; lower court: Higher Regional Court of Stuttgart, judgement of 16 November 2023, ref. 13 U 16/23).
In the recently decided case, the craftsman and his customer met at the customer’s home after the customer had been presented with a written offer to conclude a construction contract. There, the construction contract was concluded on terms that were slightly modified compared to the original offer.
After substantial – defect-free – partial services had been rendered and instalment payments had been made, the friendly consumer declared his withdrawal, referring to the lack of withdrawal instructions and demanding repayment of the €56,000.00 he had paid, while wanting to keep the switch cabinets that had been delivered without compensation.
First Instance Regional Court of Tübingen
In the first instance, common sense still prevailed: the Regional Court of Tübingen dismissed the claim with reference to Section 242 of the German Civil Code (BGB) (good faith). The demand for repayment of the total amount while retaining the delivered switch cabinets fundamentally contradicted the sense of justice, and a successful withdrawal failed due to the principles of the German legal system.
Second Instance Higher Regional Court of Stuttgart
However, the Higher Regional Court of Stuttgart then ruled without hesitation that the craftsman must pay. The withdrawal was effective, and the contractor was not entitled to compensation in accordance with the protective objectives of the relevant EU directive.
Federal Court of Justice
The Federal Court of Justice also saw no reason to subject this tangibly unfair and overly consumer-friendly decision to legal review; the appeal against non-admission was rejected. The ruling of the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court was thus final!
Summary
Contractors cannot take this problem seriously enough. It is best not to conclude any contracts off-premises, or at least not without providing effective withdrawal information and obtaining confirmation of receipt. This applies to both verbal and written contracts.