Customers can get out without an "important reason"
Karlsruhe (jur). The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) in Karlsruhe has made it easier for consumers to quit weight loss cures. According to a judgment published on Friday, December 9, 2016, termination without special reasons is possible if special therapy is used for the therapy that is said to have effects on the body (Az .: III ZR 193/16).
In the decided case, it is about the "Original Easylife Therapy". This is offered nationwide, here by a franchisee in Solingen. The therapy consists of nutritional advice and change of diet as well as daily injections with individually tailored homeopathic remedies. These are intended to boost fat burning, optimize food utilization and support skin tightening. In advance, customers fill out a questionnaire about health complaints and medication they are taking. The advertising also promised accompanying care from a doctor.
The defendant customer had agreed a four-week therapy for 1,290 euros. On the second day, however, she complained of complaints and said that she wanted to stop the therapy. Eleven days later, she submitted a certificate from her family doctor. In it he advised against a special diet for medical reasons. In the same envelope was her contract with the note: “Please cancel. Attached certificate. "
The therapy center insisted on the contract and claimed the full amount of the 1,290 euros. It was of the opinion that the customer had not really quit. In addition, the certificate does not prove that the "Easylife therapy" was really harmful to health. There is therefore no "important reason" for the termination.
But after the Karlsruhe judgment, this is not necessary. Because this is a "service of a higher kind". According to the law, these are services that require a special relationship of trust, such as medical treatment. Termination by the customer is then also permitted without an "important reason".
The BGH saw various indications of a “higher quality service”, such as the health questionnaire and the promised medical care. Above all, however, the Karlsruhe judges focused on the injected funds.
The BGH argued that the administration of an agent that is supposed to influence the body and bodily functions always requires special trust. This trust applies both to the nationwide therapy concept here and to the people who implement it on site.
Contrary to the view put forward by the therapy center, the therapy offered also requires "particularly qualified knowledge and skills". Literally it says: “The administration of a special agent that is supposed to have an impact on the body of the therapy participant affects the personal life area. Although the therapy is not medical treatment, it is equivalent to one for these reasons (…). ”
With its judgment of November 10, 2016, which has now been published in writing, the BGH finally confirmed the assessment of the regional court in Wuppertal that the "request for cancellation" of the contract is to be regarded as termination.
All in all, the Wuppertal judgment is valid. After that, the customer has to pay a share of just under 600 euros. mwo