§ 446 HGB for­war­ding lien

accor­ding to § 446 HGB for­war­ding lien

Accor­ding to § 446 HGB, the freight for­war­der has a legal pledge of rights to the goods, inclu­ding freight, com­mis­si­on, expen­ses and use. The pre­re­qui­si­te for this is that he is in pos­ses­si­on of the goods, in par­ti­cu­lar that he can dis­po­se of them by means of bills of lading, con­sign­ment bills or warehouse receipts.

(Cf. Marx/Arens: Der Auk­tio­na­tor, 2004, p. 274)

Detail­ed infor­ma­ti­on on the sub­ject of freight for­war­ders’ lien on our web­site espe­ci­al­ly for freight for­war­ders: www.speditionspfandrechtsversteigerung.de

Mana­geable cos­ts

We are obli­ged to car­ry out the valua­ti­on and rea­liza­ti­on at reasonable cos­ts, taking into account the rights of all par­ties invol­ved. The amount is based on the type of pledge and the effort requi­red to achie­ve ade­qua­te rea­liza­ti­on pro­ceeds in the inte­rests of the deb­tor. As remu­ne­ra­ti­on for his expen­ses and acti­vi­ties, the auc­tion­eer recei­ves a lump sum from the cli­ent and a so-cal­led pre­mi­um on the ham­mer pri­ce from the buy­ers. In order to avo­id any accu­sa­ti­on of squan­de­ring, the pledge should be adver­ti­sed in an appro­pria­te form. The grea­ter the demand for the pled­ged item, the lower the flat fee.

Important to know: The deb­tor bears the cos­ts of the pro­cee­dings. Unrea­lizable cos­ts can be clai­med as expen­ses for tax pur­po­ses by the cre­di­tor.

The Auc­tion­eer shall have unli­mi­t­ed and per­so­nal lia­bi­li­ty for cul­pa­ble brea­ches of duty. The cli­ent can­not release the auc­tion­eer from this lia­bi­li­ty for dama­ges. The auc­tion­eer’s remu­ne­ra­ti­on is the­r­e­fo­re always also a lia­bi­li­ty remu­ne­ra­ti­on.

Making pro­vi­si­ons in good time avo­ids nasty sur­pri­ses

Insol­ven­cy avo­id­ance is a risk that many freight for­war­ders do not have on their “radar”. If freight rates and sto­rage cos­ts are no lon­ger paid on time or are in arre­ars, the­re is a high risk of insol­ven­cy. The freight for­war­der is then threa­ten­ed not only with the loss of his cla­im, but also with insol­ven­cy pro­cee­dings. This means that if it can be assu­med that the freight for­war­der was awa­re of the debtor’s ina­bi­li­ty to pay due to slow pay­ment, unu­su­al pay­ment methods or boun­ced direct debits, among other things, then the trap “snaps shut”. Accor­ding to the cur­rent legal situa­ti­on, the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor can also recla­im all pay­ments not alre­a­dy made in cash from the car­ri­er for a peri­od of up to 10 years from this point in time. The insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor can easi­ly pro­ve this on the basis of the available receipts. Slug­gish pay­ment receipts can have fatal con­se­quen­ces (see BGH judgments ref.: IX ZR 70/08, IX ZR 134/10, IX ZR 239/09, IX ZR 3/12 and IX ZR 143/12).

How we can help:
We offer you an insol­ven­cy-pro­of solu­ti­on. In order to coun­ter the risks of insol­ven­cy avo­id­ance, we advi­se freight for­war­ders on how they can imme­dia­te­ly inte­gra­te coun­ter-stra­te­gies that are resistant to insol­ven­cy avo­id­ance into their receiv­a­bles manage­ment by inte­gra­ting their pledge of rights (see BGH AZ.: IX ZR 3/12, AZ.: IX ZR 52/10).

Con­clu­si­on: Your pati­ence with the deb­tor can place an incal­culable bur­den on your own com­pa­ny. It is the­r­e­fo­re essen­ti­al to act imme­dia­te­ly in the event of non-pay­ment or late pay­ment .

Rea­liza­ti­on of for­war­ding liens in the event of insol­ven­cy

In prin­ci­ple:
The decisi­ve fac­tor for the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor’s right of rea­liza­ti­on is that he is in pos­ses­si­on of the item (sec­tion 166 (1) InsO). If the for­war­der has pre­vious­ly asser­ted his for­war­der’s lien and sei­zed the col­la­te­ral for the pur­po­se of rea­liza­ti­on, he can have the rea­liza­ti­on car­ri­ed out by a gene­ral­ly publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eer by way of public auc­tion.

Prac­ti­cal tip:
The insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor’s cla­im to remu­ne­ra­ti­on is cal­cu­la­ted on the basis of the total amount of inco­me gene­ra­ted. It is the­r­e­fo­re in the inte­rest of the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor to keep sepa­ra­te assets in the estate. Obs­truc­tion on the part of the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor is the­r­e­fo­re to be expec­ted if the for­war­der wants to car­ry out the liqui­da­ti­on its­elf.

If the for­war­der has asser­ted his for­war­der’s lien one month befo­re fil­ing for insol­ven­cy and has sei­zed the col­la­te­ral for the pur­po­se of liqui­da­ti­on, he can have the liqui­da­ti­on car­ri­ed out. The­re is no obli­ga­ti­on to return the goods to the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor. This also eli­mi­na­tes the cost con­tri­bu­ti­ons for this col­la­te­ral and the VAT can be off­set against the rea­liza­ti­on.

It is suf­fi­ci­ent for the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor’s right of rea­liza­ti­on that he acqui­red the pro­per­ty in the appli­ca­ti­on pro­cee­dings in his capa­ci­ty as pro­vi­sio­nal insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor and that a pro­hi­bi­ti­on of sale was issued. From this point onwards, he can refu­se to hand over the goods to the for­war­der. Howe­ver, he must have actual­ly taken pos­ses­si­on. Indi­rect pos­ses­si­on by the admi­nis­tra­tor is not suf­fi­ci­ent for a rea­liza­ti­on right.

In order to enforce his right of rea­liza­ti­on, the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor requi­res direct pos­ses­si­on, i.e. actu­al con­trol over an object. If the for­war­der suc­ceeds in asser­ting his pledge of rights in good time, taking into account all legal requi­re­ments, the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor is left behind. The prio­ri­ty prin­ci­ple then appli­es in favor of the freight for­war­der. The rea­liza­ti­on of the freight for­war­der’s lien by the gene­ral­ly publicly appoin­ted auc­tion­eer almost always leads to a fas­ter rea­liza­ti­on of the cla­im and pay­ment with hig­her rea­liza­ti­on pro­ceeds than through sale by the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor. sto­rage space is not blo­cked by the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­ti­on, but is available again at short noti­ce.

Secu­ri­ty inte­rests of the freight for­war­der:
In the event of insol­ven­cy, liens beco­me inef­fec­ti­ve. Howe­ver, the for­war­der reta­ins his secu­ri­ty rights in terms of value. The pled­ged items or rights then count as sepa­ra­te assets.

In prin­ci­ple, the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor has no power of rea­liza­ti­on pur­su­ant to Sec­tion 88 InsO if the for­war­der has acqui­red his pledge of rights one month befo­re fil­ing for insol­ven­cy pro­cee­dings.

The insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor’s right of rea­liza­ti­on:
It is suf­fi­ci­ent for the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor’s right of rea­liza­ti­on that he acqui­red the pro­per­ty in the appli­ca­ti­on pro­cee­dings in his capa­ci­ty as pro­vi­sio­nal insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor and that a pro­hi­bi­ti­on of sale was issued. From this point onwards, he can defend against sur­ren­der to the for­war­der. Howe­ver, he must have actual­ly taken pos­ses­si­on. Indi­rect pos­ses­si­on by the admi­nis­tra­tor is not suf­fi­ci­ent for a rea­liza­ti­on right.

If the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor is in pos­ses­si­on of the pledge, it is clas­si­fied as a sepa­ra­te asset. He is then entit­led to rea­li­ze the pledge.

  • He is free to deci­de how and at what pri­ce he rea­li­zes the goods. He may rea­li­ze the goods on the open mar­ket or com­mis­si­on third par­ties of his choice to rea­li­ze the goods.
  • The insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor or the per­son appoin­ted by him is not obli­ged to deter­mi­ne the hig­hest bidder in a regu­la­ted liqui­da­ti­on pro­ce­du­re. He may sell to the first bidder or to anyo­ne he likes at any pri­ce.
  • The insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor recei­ves a lump sum of at least 9% plus 19% VAT from the liqui­da­ti­on pro­ceeds and fur­ther lump sums for the liqui­da­ti­on cos­ts. If the actu­al liqui­da­ti­on cos­ts incur­red are signi­fi­cant­ly hig­her or lower than the lump sums, the actu­al cos­ts incur­red must be appli­ed (sec­tion 171 (2) sen­tence 2 InsO). As a result, expe­ri­ence shows that sto­rage are­as are blo­cked for a long time. The decisi­ve fac­tor for the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor’s right of rea­liza­ti­on is that he is in pos­ses­si­on of the item (sec­tion 166 (1) InsO).

Obli­ga­ti­ons of the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor in the liqui­da­ti­on:
The Insol­ven­cy Code addres­ses the fears of for­war­ders entit­led to sepa­ra­te satis­fac­tion that the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor could abu­se his right of liqui­da­ti­on by remai­ning inac­ti­ve and not pur­suing the sale swift­ly by means of the gene­ral obli­ga­ti­on to liqui­da­te after the report­ing date (Sec­tion 159 InsO) and, abo­ve all, by the fact that the les­sor can demand the inte­rest owed from the insol­ven­cy estate on an ongo­ing basis from the report­ing date (Sec­tion 169 InsO). The inte­rest run ends with the pay­ment of the rea­liza­ti­on pro­ceeds to the for­war­der. The inte­rest rate depends on the con­trac­tu­al agree­ments. If the deb­tor is in default, default inte­rest can also be deman­ded.

Befo­re the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor sells the pled­ged pro­per­ty to a third par­ty, he must inform the car­ri­er entit­led to sepa­ra­te satis­fac­tion how and at what pri­ce the item or right is to be sold. The insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor may sell a mova­ble item in which he has a pledge of rights by pri­va­te trea­ty.

Important: Pur­su­ant to Sec­tion 168 InsO, the for­war­der has the right, within one week of noti­fi­ca­ti­on of the inten­ti­on to sell, to pro­vi­de evi­dence of a more favorable rea­liza­ti­on opti­on or to have such evi­dence pro­vi­ded. The insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor must then take advan­ta­ge of this oppor­tu­ni­ty or place the for­war­der in the same posi­ti­on as if he had taken advan­ta­ge of the oppor­tu­ni­ty.

Prac­ti­cal tip: Insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tors are rather reluc­tant to see evi­dence of bet­ter rea­liza­ti­on by the for­war­der, as this often does not fit into their over­all sett­le­ment stra­tegy.

Important note to avo­id legal dis­ad­van­ta­ges:

  • The for­war­der must imme­dia­te­ly assert his rights to sepa­ra­te satis­fac­tion vis-à-vis the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor in wri­ting, spe­ci­fy­ing the object or right to which the right to sepa­ra­te satis­fac­tion rela­tes.

Fur­ther infor­ma­ti­on to pro­tect the freight for­war­der from finan­cial los­ses and dis­ad­van­ta­ges:

  • The insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor may not demand any “segre­ga­ti­on fees” from the freight for­war­der.
  • The freight for­war­der is not obli­ged to pro­vi­de infor­ma­ti­on to the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor. He does not have to hand over any docu­ments. Even if the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tors often cla­im the oppo­si­te. The insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor is often in need of evi­dence due to the debtor’s chao­tic book­kee­ping, for exam­p­le.
  • Com­pared to the rea­liza­ti­on of pled­ged goods by the publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eer, this usual­ly means con­sidera­ble dis­ad­van­ta­ges for the for­war­der. The rea­liza­ti­on pro­ce­du­re is bey­ond the con­trol of the for­war­der, espe­ci­al­ly with regard to the rea­liza­ti­on cos­ts. In prac­ti­ce, the pos­si­bi­li­ty of the land­lord pro­vi­ding evi­dence of a bet­ter rea­liza­ti­on opti­on in accordance with Sec­tion 168 InsO pro­ves to be impos­si­ble to imple­ment in most cases — it is not part of the for­war­der’s core com­pe­tence to gene­ra­te pro­s­pec­ti­ve buy­ers within such a short peri­od of time.

Release: The insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor is not obli­ged to make use of his right of rea­liza­ti­on. Ins­tead, he can lea­ve the rea­liza­ti­on to the cre­di­tor in accordance with (sec­tion 170 (2) InsO). This is expe­di­ent if the cre­di­tor has more favorable liqui­da­ti­on opti­ons, for exam­p­le becau­se he wis­hes to com­mis­si­on a publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eer who is well estab­lished in the liqui­da­ti­on of pled­ges of rights. Even in this case, it is advi­sa­ble not to wai­ve the pri­vi­le­ges of lien rea­liza­ti­on.

This is how we can help:

  • We can deter­mi­ne the value of the sepa­ra­te assets by means of a lien rea­liza­ti­on report, from which the inte­rest can then be deter­mi­ned in accordance with § 169InsO.
  • As a gene­ral rule, we can always best help for­war­ders to rea­li­ze their claims if they act imme­dia­te­ly in the event of pay­ment pro­blems. It is the freight for­war­der’s right not to accept the sale of the pledge to the buy­er pro­po­sed by the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor. Becau­se it often does not fit in with the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor’s liqui­da­ti­on stra­tegy, they are reluc­tant to see evi­dence of a hig­her bidder. We have thou­sands of cont­acts with pro­s­pec­ti­ve buy­ers and can help to gene­ra­te the hig­hest bidder exclu­si­ve­ly at short noti­ce through a FIRE SALE. The pre­re­qui­si­te is that for­war­ding agents cont­act us prompt­ly. Freight for­war­ders can only gain from this, as they incur no cos­ts and the pro­ceeds from the sale are almost always hig­her than when sold by the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­ti­on.

Con­clu­si­on:
Expe­ri­ence shows that insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tors often wai­ve their right of rea­liza­ti­on if they noti­ce that the for­war­der is facing a well-foun­ded “head­wind”.

If the realization of collateral
is time-critical and confidential:
Contact us.