Fee for sending a prior asset disclosure despite the creditor’s wishes

666 M 1273/17Court of First InstanceJul 7, 2017Debt enforcement and bankruptcy lawDismissed

Extracted by Omnilex

Omnilex summary

The creditor side objected to the cost assessment by enforcement officer O, contesting the KV 261 GvKostG fee after the officer sent a copy of an asset disclosure made within the previous two years, despite the creditor’s stated wish otherwise. Düsseldorf Local Court dismissed the objection at the creditor side’s expense. It held that, before the BGH’s ruling of 27 October 2016 (I ZB 21/16), forwarding the recent disclosure in these circumstances did not constitute incorrect handling under § 7(1) GvKostG. The court granted leave to appeal.

Omnilex headnote

GvKostG § 7(1); KV 261, KV 604; ZPO §§ 802c, 802d: Before the BGH’s decision of 27 October 2016 (I ZB 21/16), an enforcement officer did not engage in incorrect handling within the meaning of § 7(1) GvKostG merely by sending the creditor a copy of an asset disclosure already submitted within the preceding two years, even where the creditor had expressly requested otherwise. The fact that the creditor’s preference was not followed did not, under the legal position then applicable, make the fee chargeable under KV 261 improper.

Full text

Amtsgericht Düsseldorf — 666 M 1273/17 — Beschluss

Entscheidungsdatum: 2017-07-07

Aktenzeichen: 666 M 1273/17

ECLI: ECLI:DE:AGD:2017:0707.666M1273.17.00

Dokumenttyp: Beschluss

Spruchkörper: Abteilung 666

Normen: GvKostG § 7 Abs. 1; GvKostG KV 261 KV 604; ZPO § 802 c und § 802 d

Leitsätze

Bis zur Entscheidung des BGH vom 27.10.2016 - I ZB 21/16 stellt es keine unrichtige Sachbehandlung durch den Gerichtsvollzieher im Sinne des § 7 Abs. 1 GvKostG dar, wenn er dem Gläubiger im Verfahren auf Abgabe der Vermögensauskunft entgegen dessen erklärten Wunsch einen Abdruck einer bereits in den letzten zwei Jahren abgegebenen Vermögensauskunft zuleitet.

Tenor

wird die Erinnerung der Gläubigerseite gegen den Kostenansatz der Obergerichtsvollzieherin O vom 29.01.2016 betreffend den Ansatz der Gebühr KV 261 GvKostG auf deren Kosten zurückgewiesen.

Das Gericht lässt die Beschwerde zu.

Keywords

enforcement costsasset disclosureincorrect handlingenforcement officercreditor objection

Key legal questions extracted by Omnilex

Whether the enforcement officer’s delivery of a copy of an asset disclosure made within the previous two years, contrary to the creditor’s expressed wishes, constituted incorrect handling of the matter under § 7(1) GvKostG and invalidated the KV 261 fee.

Before the BGH decision of 27 October 2016, this conduct did not constitute incorrect handling of the matter for purposes of § 7(1) GvKostG.

The court applied the legal position before the BGH’s decision of 27 October 2016, under which forwarding the recent asset disclosure despite the creditor’s contrary request did not amount to incorrect handling.

Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude

Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.