Value compensation in the case of withdrawal from Parship membership

In the event of withdrawal from a paid membership in the online dating platform parship, the user must indeed pay value compensation. According to a recent decision of the Regional Court (LG) Hamburg, the amount of value compensation for the services used is calculated according to their objective value and subject matter.

Parship operates one of the largest online dating agencies in Europe and offers users, in addition to a free membership, a Premium membership for 6, 12 and 24 months. Depending on the agreed duration of the Premium membership, the user is charged staggered fees. The range of services offered as part of a Premium membership includes a contact guarantee. For example, with a Premium membership of 12 months, 7 contacts with other members are guaranteed. A contact is considered to be any free-text response read by the respective user in reply to a message sent by him.

After concluding the Premium membership, users already have the option to contact other users before the statutory withdrawal period expires. In the event that the user exercises his right of withdrawal under distance selling law, Parship provides for a value compensation claim of up to 75% of the fee agreed for the entire term if the user has already recorded contacts. The Consumer Centre Hamburg considered this regulation to be unlawful and misleading and took legal action against it. With success.

Court decision

The Regional Court (LG) Hamburg granted the claim in full by judgment of 22.07.2014 (406 HKO 66/14).

Parship violated both the new and old statutory provisions regarding the amount of value compensation in the event of exercise of the right of withdrawal with its value compensation claim. The value compensation claim furthermore contains a misleading of the consumer regarding his rights in the event of withdrawal to terminate the contract without excessive value compensation.

The value compensation for the services already used by the consumer in the event of withdrawal is calculated under the old legal situation according to the objective value of the service. The objective value is calculated according to the subject matter of the service, which in the present case consists in providing the user with the possibility, within the scope of the Premium membership, to contact other users during the agreed period and to search for a partner among them. The guaranteed minimum number of contacts is apparently not the core of Parship's service promise. Rather, the core of the service promise is the ability to search for a partner among the other users over the agreed period with the support of Parship. The agreed fees also reflect this, as they increase with the duration of the agreed use. The value compensation to be paid in the event of withdrawal should therefore also be calculated on a time-apportioned basis. The method of calculation chosen by Parship leads to an unlawful devaluation of the right of withdrawal if it charges the consumer, for example, who has already received 7 rejections, 75% of the agreed fee for this.

The possibility of misuse does not justify the unlawful amount either, since Parship is free to enable the use of the online service only after the expiration of the withdrawal period.

Even under the new regulation of the right of withdrawal, the calculation method of value compensation is not justified. According to this, the total price must be used as the basis for calculating the value compensation and calculated on the basis of the ratio of the services provided up to the withdrawal to the total contractual services. Here too, the court applies a time-apportioned calculation.

Conclusion

Users of paid online dating services must not be deterred from exercising their right of withdrawal by excessive value compensation claims. Regulations that contain comparable value compensation obligations violate statutory consumer protection provisions and are thus unfair competition. Consumers have the option of demanding repayment of the excessive amount. In addition, competitors can also assert competition law claims, in particular for cessation.