If a repair shop charges for uneconomical services, it violates its contractual obligation to operate economically. (Photo: © Dmitry Kalinovsky/123RF.com)
Read aloud:
If a car repair shop repairs a wrecked vehicle unnecessarily expensively and therefore uneconomically, the customer can claim damages. This was decided by the Saarbrücken Regional Court.
Specialist companies may not simply adopt unusual or superfluous items from an expert's report . Instead, they must critically examine the specified work for cost-effectiveness. This applies particularly when costing software issues clear warnings about unusual paint systems and high costs. A recent case before the Saarbrücken Regional Court illustrates how this obligation to examine the situation plays out in practice.
Following a traffic accident, a car repair shop repaired the vehicle. Previously, the owner had commissioned a private damage assessment from an expert, which estimated the painting work would require 80 labor units. The repair shop billed the customer exactly according to the damage assessment.
The motor vehicle liability insurer of the driver who caused the accident initially settled the bill of approximately €6.100 in full. Later, however, they demanded a refund of €1.050,81 from the repair shop. Their argument: the shop had billed for certain paintwork in an excessive and therefore uneconomical manner – 80 labor units instead of the 56 required by the manufacturer's specifications.
The customer assigned her own rights of recovery against the workshop to the insurance company, which then sued for the amount.
Operations management
Operations management
Operations management
The Saarbrücken Regional Court, in the second instance, fully upheld the insurance company's claim: If a repair shop bills for services not rendered or for uneconomical work, it violates its contractual obligation to operate economically and is liable under Section 280 Paragraph 1 of the German Civil Code (BGB) . A repair shop may not blindly rely on an expert's report if it clearly recommends uneconomical measures.
The court clarified that a repair order based on an existing expert report does not absolve the business of its obligation to inform customers of demonstrably more economical alternatives . As a specialized repair shop, the workshop must choose the most economical repair method if this is evident from readily available manufacturer specifications. The court ruled that the workshop must verify the planned work steps itself.
This process is made easier nowadays by the fact that modern calculation programs often issue automatic warnings when problematic or unusual paint systems are selected. This significantly simplifies the process for businesses to identify potential cost inefficiency. For the correct calculation of standard accident damage, the so-called AZT paint system is the relevant standard, not the specific system for manufacturer warranty work.
Since the workshop charged for 80 labor units instead of the required 56, it had to pay the difference back to the insurer.
Saarbrücken Regional Court, Judgment of October 30, 2025, Case No. 13 S 18/25
The advisors at the Chambers of Crafts will be happy to help you with any legal questions!
DHB now also available digitally! Simply click here and register for the digital German Crafts Journal (DHB)!
Newsletter
Write a comment