display
Missed the deadline and the contract is automatically extended.
That happens to hundreds of thousands of consumers every year.
It can quickly become expensive for them.
After all, many mobile phone providers, energy providers or fitness studios usually not only offer long-term contracts.
Anyone who forgets to terminate on time is often stuck in their contract for another year - on the old terms.
The federal government now wants to prevent nasty treaty surprises by law.
The federal cabinet agreed on a corresponding initiative on Wednesday after months of discussions.
According to this, automatic contract extensions of more than three months should only be permitted if companies have informed their customers of their possibility of termination in advance - for example by letter, email or SMS.
Even the two-year contracts that have so far been popular are only allowed to be offered by companies if consumers can simultaneously get a one-year contract for the same services.
On a monthly average, this can only be a maximum of 25 percent more expensive than a two-year term.
display
In addition, the notice period is to be shortened.
In future it would be sufficient for consumers to cancel at least one month before the end of the contract.
And electricity and gas suppliers will soon find it more difficult to conclude new contracts outside of the basic supply.
These should no longer be agreed exclusively on the phone.
Instead, customers would have to submit their contractual declaration in writing.
General ban on two-year contracts prevented
"Consumers are too often ripped off and disadvantaged," said Federal Justice Minister Christine Lambrecht (SPD) on Wednesday.
"With the initiative launched today, we are putting a stop to these practices."
Long contract terms, such as cell phone contracts, would restrict consumers' freedom of choice and prevent them from switching to more attractive offers, explained Lambrecht.
The planned law comes very late.
Almost a year ago, the SPD-led Federal Ministry of Justice presented a first draft.
display
But the project was stuck for months in the coordination with Federal Minister of Economics Peter Altmaier (CDU).
Lambrecht originally planned to completely ban contracts with a two-year term.
In addition, an automatic renewal should generally only be permitted for three months.
Above all, the planned maximum runtimes went too far for the Union.
"Consumers must be better protected from unfair contracts," says Jan-Marco Luczak, spokesman for consumer protection for the Union group.
At the same time, however, consumers must be given the opportunity to conclude contracts according to their individual needs.
The fact that the Union has prevented a general ban on two-year contracts is also in the interests of customers.
"Longer contract terms regularly offer consumers price advantages and loyalty discounts, because companies then have investment security and can calculate prices better," says Luczak.
Just blank announcements?
display
Above all, a ban on two-year contracts would have turned the business model of many mobile communications companies on its head.
These often offer the latest smartphones at their tariffs, the purchase price of which the customers then usually pay with the mobile phone bill over two years.
This is the only way that some consumers can afford the devices.
But fitness studios, internet providers and even dating agencies often want to keep their customers for more than a year.
By law, they would soon have to offer their customers at least a one-year alternative.
The opposition sees the current compromise only empty announcements with a long lead time.
"After a long squabble with the Federal Ministry of Economics, there is not much left of fairness and improved consumer protection," says Tabea Rößner, spokeswoman for consumer protection for the Green parliamentary group.
Price advantages and loyalty discounts are pure window dressing.
Instead, longer contract terms would only prevent effective competition in the telecommunications sector, which is dominated by a few powerful companies.
In addition, Rößner complains that the ban on telephone contracts only applies to energy suppliers.
“On the phone, contracts can still be chattered cheerfully,” comments the member of the Bundestag.
"Unsatisfactory from the point of view of consumer protection"
The Greens are calling for more far-reaching measures to protect consumers from alleged rip-offs - such as an electronic cancellation button on the Internet.
"As quickly as you can conclude a contract online, you should be able to cancel it just as easily," demands Rößner.
How difficult it is for some companies to make it for customers to terminate contracts on the Internet has been investigated by scientists from the Pforzheim University on behalf of the Green parliamentary group.
In a study that is exclusively available to WELT, the consumer researchers examined the termination procedures of 37 large providers from sectors such as telecommunications, insurance or energy supply.
The result is "unsatisfactory from the point of view of consumer protection," sum up the authors.
Cancellation processes are unnecessarily complicated and information is often difficult to find.
display
According to the study, consumers sometimes had to click up to six times from any product page before the providers even mentioned details of cancellations for the first time.
On average, users reached their destination after just under two and a half clicks.
The researchers were also able to analyze the internal customer area of 19 of the 37 companies.
With six of the providers, customers had no way of immediately canceling online.
At the other companies, customers had to click up to 17 times before they could send their cancellation request.
On average, it took just under five clicks.
According to the study, a total of 17 of the 37 companies analyzed have also set up special hurdles that could deter customers from canceling.
For example, many telecommunications providers only issued notice of termination.
17 clicks to cancel
With a click, the customer signals that they want to cancel.
But he has to confirm this again separately - for example by email.
With this, providers want to keep the chance open to persuade their customers to stay with improved offers.
Insurance companies, on the other hand, often attracted attention with confusing information or complicated contact forms.
If consumers want to cancel online, the final click is often delayed by interim questions, some of which are superfluous.
One of the things that struck the study authors negatively was an online cancellation process for Allianz.
A total of 17 clicks were necessary from the home page of the internal customer area to the final termination.
The reason: users had to enter all customer data such as the insurance number manually to cancel - despite prior registration in the customer account.
As a positive example, the consumer researchers praised the website of the mobile phone provider Congstar.
The company has published all termination information on a separate page.
In addition to instructions for online cancellation, customers will also find a cancellation form there.
However, the study authors point out that these are exemplary examples from randomly selected companies and not purchase recommendations.
Next, the Bundestag has to deal with the planned law - but probably not until next year.
The last word, however, does not seem to have been spoken yet: CDU politician Luczak has already announced that one-year contracts are only permitted with a maximum price premium of 25 percent.