The “eternal” contradiction
Life insurance: How to get your money back years later
07.05.2025 – 9:53 amReading time: 3 min.
Anyone who has taken out their life insurance between 1994 and 2007 can still object today. However, this is only worth it if certain requirements are met.
Take out life insurance and still contradict years later? What sounds absurd at first glance is possible in practice – citing a judgment of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH). Anyone who has taken out insurance according to the so -called policy model between 1994 and 2007 could be entitled to repay their contributions. Prerequisite: The policy of objection at that time was incorrect. Many insured people do not even know that they are entitled to this right. And who heard of it, wonders: does the “eternal” right to object really apply forever?
In 2014, the Federal Court of Justice made a fundamental judgment (Az. IV ZR 76/11), which still employs the insurance industry. In it, the court made it clear: if a life insurance contract was concluded between 1994 and the end of 2007 according to the policy model and the insured did not properly instruct the right to object, this right still existed many years later. It only begins when all documents are completely present and the instruction is correct, clear and understandable.
Not every lack of information makes an objection policy ineffective. It is crucial whether it was designed in “clear form” and contained all the statements required by law. Since August 1, 2001, it also had to include the note that the objection can be made in text form-also by email. Whether printed in fat, framed or highlighted in color: The Federal Court of Justice has repeatedly clarified that the instruction must optically stand out (Az. IV ZR 41/13, IV ZR 35/14).
- Life insurance in fact check: When it is worth it
- Run to the heir: If life insurance does not pay
If this clarity is missing or are important notes incomplete, the right to object remains.
If you effectively contradicts, you can basically call back the contributions paid. However, the insurer may deduct certain amounts, such as the share for the insurance coverage. The insurer also retains the capital gains tax including solidarity surcharge if he has already paid it to the tax office. Losses from the funds can also be counted towards counter -bound contracts.
Positive for consumers: final and administrative costs as well as installment surcharges must always be fully reimbursed. And the insured persons are also generally entitled to use – if they can prove that the insurer has made profits with their contributions (Az. IV ZR 384/14, IV ZR 448/14).
Not every contradiction is automatically successful. According to the case law, anyone who has used their contract for years, even ceded or reactivated, could behave in accordance with the case law. This principle, which is anchored in § 242 BGB, states that all parties have to act fairly and honestly in a legal relationship. Town acting means that someone makes their rights or duties in a way that is unreasonable or unfair to the other part.
In such cases, the objection can be considered “forfeited” – for example if the contract actively served to secure credit (Az. IV ZR 130/15) or the insured person had the contract returned after termination (Az. IV ZR 117/15).
Another obstacle is the limitation period. Although the right of objection itself does not become time, but the claim for repayment. The BGH decided in 2015 (Az. IV ZR 103/15): The three -year limitation period only begins at the end of the year in which the objection was explained.
Mr. Müller took out life insurance in 1998 and terminated it in 2009. It was only six years later that he learned that the instructions on the objection was incorrect – and contradicted the contract in August 2014.
According to BGH (Az. IV ZR 103/15), the three -year limitation period only begins at the end of the year in which the objection was explained – here at the end of 2014. Mr. Müller should therefore have claimed his recovery by the end of 2017. If she came later, she would be time -barred.
Conclusion: The contradiction itself remains possible – but the claim for repayment can become time -barred. Those who contradict should act quickly.
The “eternal” right of contradiction is not a myth – but also not a free ticket. Only those who have taken out life insurance between 1994 and 2007 and have not received any correct instructions can benefit from this. It depends on many details: from designing instruction to your own behavior over the years. Anyone who thinks they are affected should have the contract checked. A successful contradiction can be worthwhile – even many years after the end of the contract.
