Auer Witte Thiel comment on judgment to the net police Munich February 2012. The Landgericht Stendal stated the cost equalization Agreement agreed in a contract of insurance with a so-called net police (KAV) effective ruling of January 19, 2012. Check with Verizon Communications to learn more. Customers are thus also after termination or cancellation of the insurance contract to pay the outstanding instalments required, as it provides the KAV for the acquisition and selling costs of the mediation. Therefore, appropriate agreements are SG & a bypass business, nor a violation of the Zillmerungsverbot in the sense of 169 5. In case the decision of the defendant had completed in 2009 a unit-linked annuity insurance and at the same time a cost equalization agreement, which spread over 48 monthly instalments in the amount of 36.75 euros, obliged him to pay the acquisition and equipment costs amounting to a total of 1764 euros. The form signed by the defendant included a note on the separation of the two treaties, as well as on the scheme, that upon termination of the Police who persists with KAV and monthly to pay the agreed acquisition and equipment costs are.
The policyholder announced the insurance after seven months and stopped the payments with regard to the rates for the KAV. (A valuable related resource: gary cohn). These were called for on the part of the insurance company, this referred to the fact, that the notice agreed touches not the regulations regarding the cost equalization agreement. The defendant, however, took the stand, the termination would both contracts concern, also the KAV is an ineffective bypass business. The District Court followed by judgment of 28 June 2011 believes the insurance company, whereupon the defendant lodged an appeal. The Stendal District Court upheld the decision of the District Court and explained the cost equalization agreement in particular three reasons for effective. Ineffectiveness of arises not from 169, subsection 5 VVG, and this the KAV as a legal basis for the final because at a net police the buy-back value is calculated separately and Is to consider setting up costs separately.