Savings Bank must lead attorney for subscription traps Olaf tank an account The trouble for consumers on subscription traps is large and the damage is enormous.
No reputable company would therefore be associated with such fraud was or similar offenses in connection, which is why financial institutions following complaints from consumers' bank accounts to which the subscription traps demands to be paid, usually terminate quickly. This prevents
Although the actions of the cheaters, but it complicates them. Resources that will be after the termination of the account been transferring from bruised consumers flow back to the accounts of the referrer and thousands just sent invoices / reminders will be useless, since no valid account number on it is so
The subscription traps operators, and their collection lawyers Katja Guenther
and now
Olaf tank try a lot to each financial institution in court to force them to guide their account.
How
Osnabrück newspaper reported , failed
Olaf tank now before the Administrative Court of Lüneburg, as he tried for his dubious machinations to secure an account with the bank
. The Lüneburg court overturned the order of the Administrative Court Enstcheidung Osnabrück, which was of the view
Olaf tank would have a right to a checking account.
The Higher Administrative Court of Lüneburg came to the conclusion that the obligations to provide an account is not apparent from the Savings Bank Act and violated by an account termination, or non-approval of an account that no fundamental rights of the lawyer would be questionable. The savings bank
was entitled to reject the establishment of an account when they could suffer by the actions of their customers a reputation damage.
Other courts have already judged as the Higher Administrative Court of Lüneburg.
failed early as 2008 subscription traps operators thus to court to secure a checking account for their rip-off, the Higher Regional Court Hamm stated this:
If a checking account used to record revenue through a "pay-trap" used on-line is, this one important reason is that entitled the bank to terminate the current contract.
OLG Hamm, decision v. 13.10.2008, Az 31 W 38/08 ( Full Text ) also failed
Katja Guenther its action before the Regional Court of Munich I that it should secure an account. See 28 O 398/09
this::
LG München I, Judgement of 12.05.2009, AZ
Munich savings bank can "debited" relationship with Katja Günter finally quit