Col­la­te­ral enforce­ment —
How it works

Pled­ges of rights — rea­liza­ti­on: The appli­ca­ti­on of con­trac­tu­al and sta­tu­to­ry pled­ges of rights and other rea­liza­ti­on rights enables entit­led cre­di­tors to rea­li­ze their claims in a legal­ly com­pli­ant and eco­no­mic­al­ly advan­ta­ge­ous man­ner by way of public auc­tion — fas­ter and more effi­ci­ent­ly than leng­thy dun­ning and court pro­cee­dings or M&A pro­ces­ses.

A com­pre­hen­si­ve and prac­ti­ce-ori­en­ted expl­ana­ti­on of legal­ly com­pli­ant rea­liza­ti­on based on pledge of rights, inclu­ding the legal basis, stra­te­gic imple­men­ta­ti­on and eco­no­mic advan­ta­ges.

The publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eer is aut­ho­ri­zed by the sta­te to car­ry out sales based on con­trac­tu­al or sta­tu­to­ry pled­ges of rights and thus ful­fills a sove­reign task within the admi­nis­tra­ti­on of jus­ti­ce. Find out more in the video.

The rea­liza­ti­on of a pledge of rights is a sove­reign act that is sub­ject to strict com­pli­ance with legal pro­vi­si­ons. In our infor­ma­ti­on video, Ava­tar Katha­ri­na explains in detail how you can initia­te a legal­ly com­pli­ant col­la­te­ral enforce­ment (public auc­tion) quick­ly and easi­ly. In addi­ti­on, she pro­vi­des valuable tips on com­mis­sio­ning a publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eer.

Note: The pri­vi­le­ges of the exclu­si­on of war­ran­ty pur­su­ant to Sec­tion 445 of the Ger­man Civil Code (BGB) and, in par­ti­cu­lar, of acqui­si­ti­on in good faith pur­su­ant to Sec­tion 935 (2) BGB also app­ly to a vol­un­t­a­ry, publicly announ­ced and publicly acces­si­ble auc­tion by a publicly appoin­ted and sworn auc­tion­eer, which distin­gu­is­hes this form of sale by us from vol­un­t­a­ry sales such as NPL or M&A tran­sac­tions in a legal­ly advan­ta­ge­ous man­ner.

Thank you for your inte­rest and we recom­mend that you watch the video in full.

After­wards, plea­se click on “Initia­te col­la­te­ral enforce­ment: direct­ly to deter­mi­ne the matu­ri­ty of the depo­sit” in the navi­ga­ti­on bar on the left. An over­view of the rele­vant forms for spe­ci­fic cases is available to regis­tered users. Once you have regis­tered, sel­ect the appro­pria­te form, com­ple­te it and send it to us direct­ly. As publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eers, we are sworn to sec­re­cy towards third par­ties.

Regis­tered users can also access the form over­view via the home­page (“Home”) direct­ly via “Log­in” (top right) or via “Home” > ‘scroll down to the blue foo­ter > “Direct to” and then “Initia­te col­la­te­ral enforce­ment”.

We will cont­act you short­ly after recei­ving your form to deter­mi­ne whe­ther you are rea­dy for a pledge. Based on this infor­ma­ti­on, we will talk to you spe­ci­fi­cal­ly about your case.

The advan­ta­ges of col­la­te­ral enforce­ment.

Take the con­ven­tio­nal legal rou­te via the dun­ning and legal action pro­cess

Alt­hough this opti­on is pos­si­ble, it has con­sidera­ble dis­ad­van­ta­ges. On the one hand, legal action is often asso­cia­ted with high cos­ts. Second­ly, the capa­ci­ty of the judi­cia­ry is limi­t­ed due to the lar­ge num­ber of cases, which leads to the courts being over­loa­ded. The­se bot­t­len­ecks result in pro­tra­c­ted legal pro­cee­dings. In addi­ti­on, many of the items that can still be sei­zed and that could be used as part of an enforce­ment order in accordance with the Ger­man Code of Civil Pro­ce­du­re (ZPO) are sub­ject to a dis­pro­por­tio­na­te­ly high loss in value due to their age.

The bet­ter alter­na­ti­ve: Appli­ca­ti­on of con­trac­tu­al and sta­tu­to­ry pled­ges of rights to reme­dy faults

This legal pro­cess enables entre­pre­neurs to rea­li­ze due receiv­a­bles effi­ci­ent­ly and cost-effec­tively or to redu­ce lia­bi­li­ties. The sei­zu­re and rea­liza­ti­on pro­ce­du­re takes place within a pro­ven legal frame­work.

The advan­ta­ges for the cre­di­tor:

Deb­tors usual­ly ove­re­sti­ma­te the mate­ri­al value of the items or rights pled­ged by the cre­di­tor. They fear a sale below their expec­ted value and the sup­po­sed loss of repu­ta­ti­on of a public auc­tion. In the case of an auc­tion of pled­ged com­pa­ny shares, expe­ri­ence has shown that pre­vious mana­ging direc­tors want to pre­vent the trans­pa­ren­cy about the com­pa­ny that the cre­di­tor can obtain after the auc­tion. Some deb­tors beco­me wil­ling to pay at the latest when the auc­tion­eer informs them of the upco­ming auc­tion date.

If the rea­liza­ti­on pro­ceeds are not suf­fi­ci­ent to cover the enti­re cla­im, the value in dis­pu­te of any sub­se­quent dun­ning or legal pro­cee­dings is redu­ced by the amount alre­a­dy rea­li­zed. This reduc­tion in the value in dis­pu­te has a direct influence on the att­or­ney­’s inte­rest in fees. In prac­ti­ce, it can the­r­e­fo­re be obser­ved that some lawy­ers some­ti­mes give pre­fe­rence to court pro­cee­dings — not neces­s­a­ri­ly for reasons of effi­ci­en­cy, but in light of the eco­no­mic effects of a pre­vious suc­cessful public col­la­te­ral enforce­ment.

Items left behind by the deb­tor block sto­rage space and real estate and cau­se not only cos­ts but also loss of use. Through the public auc­tion and the asso­cia­ted legal­ly com­pli­ant trans­fer of owner­ship to third par­ties or, if appli­ca­ble, to the cre­di­tor hims­elf, the pro­per­ty can be cle­ared imme­dia­te­ly after the bid is accept­ed — the pre­mi­ses are thus imme­dia­te­ly available to the cre­di­tor again. Time is money: A short-term evic­tion can be rea­li­zed in a legal­ly com­pli­ant man­ner via the land­lor­d’s lien pur­su­ant to Sec­tion 562 BGB or by way of a limi­t­ed enforce­ment order pur­su­ant to Sec­tion 885a ZPO in con­junc­tion with Sec­tion 383 BGB.

Due claims can be rea­li­zed at short noti­ce, pro­vi­ded that the pled­ged assets ser­ving as secu­ri­ty for the cre­di­tor are suf­fi­ci­ent, valuable and rea­lizable. In the­se cases, the rea­liza­ti­on usual­ly takes place by way of public auc­tion in accordance with Sec­tions 1233 et seq. BGB, wher­eby the knock­down to the hig­hest bidder leads to the imme­dia­te, at least par­ti­al, repay­ment of the cla­im due.

The pro­ceeds from the sale are irre­vo­ca­bly deter­mi­ned in the public auc­tion by knock­down to the hig­hest bidder and con­sti­tu­tes a sove­reign act. The knock­down not only trans­fers owner­ship with legal effect, but also irre­vo­ca­bly estab­lishes the mar­ket value of the auc­tion­ed item or right. Sub­se­quent cor­rec­tion or con­te­sta­ti­on of this value is excluded, as the knock­down as a sove­reign act marks the legal­ly com­pli­ant con­clu­si­on of the liqui­da­ti­on pro­ce­du­re. This legal effect crea­tes legal con­for­mi­ty and trans­pa­ren­cy for both the cre­di­tor and the deb­tor with regard to the amount of the rea­li­zed pro­ceeds.

If deb­tors fail to meet their lia­bi­li­ties as they fall due, the­re is usual­ly a risk that insol­ven­cy pro­cee­dings will be initia­ted. Apart from any res­truc­tu­ring or reor­ga­niza­ti­on mea­su­res at the expen­se of the cre­di­tors, the pur­po­se of the­se pro­cee­dings is to satis­fy the claims of all cre­di­tors from the insol­ven­cy estate on a pro rata basis only. Accor­ding to sur­veys by the Fede­ral Sta­tis­ti­cal Office and various stu­dies (inclu­ding the IfM Bonn and the ZIn­sO), the avera­ge insol­ven­cy rate for unse­cu­red cre­di­tors has remain­ed con­stant at around 3% to 5% in recent years — in some cases even signi­fi­cant­ly lower.

Cre­di­tors with con­trac­tual­ly or legal­ly secu­red pled­ges of rights enjoy a pre­fe­ren­ti­al legal posi­ti­on in the­se pro­cee­dings: Their claims are dee­med to be rights to sepa­ra­te satis­fac­tion pur­su­ant to Sec­tions 49, 50 InsO and are to be ser­viced pre­fe­ren­ti­al­ly from the rea­liza­ti­on pro­ceeds of the encum­be­red col­la­te­ral — regu­lar­ly in full and befo­re all other insol­ven­cy cre­di­tors.

It is the­r­e­fo­re stron­gly advi­sa­ble to ensu­re legal­ly com­pli­ant col­la­te­ra­liza­ti­on through con­trac­tu­al pled­ging at an ear­ly stage, espe­ci­al­ly in the case of valuable receiv­a­bles. The pled­ging of com­pa­ny shares (Sec­tions 1204 et seq. BGB) has pro­ven to be par­ti­cu­lar­ly effec­ti­ve in this con­text. Pur­su­ant to sec­tion 161 (1) InsO, the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor is not entit­led to dis­po­se of pled­ged rights; rea­liza­ti­on remains with the pled­gee. The Fede­ral Court of Jus­ti­ce express­ly con­firm­ed this in its ruling of Octo­ber 27, 2022 (IX ZR 145/21):

“A GmbH share pled­ged by the deb­tor is not sub­ject to the insol­ven­cy admi­nis­tra­tor’s power of admi­nis­tra­ti­on and dis­po­sal in insol­ven­cy pro­cee­dings. It is rea­li­zed exclu­si­ve­ly by the pled­gee, for exam­p­le by way of public auc­tion.”

Con­clu­si­on: Tho­se who estab­lish pled­ges of rights in good time and initia­te their rea­liza­ti­on by a qua­li­fied, publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eer secu­re a pri­vi­le­ged legal and eco­no­mic posi­ti­on — and effec­tively pro­tect their claims against the pos­si­ble thre­at of deva­lua­ti­on in insol­ven­cy pro­cee­dings.

As ful­ly qua­li­fied mer­chants, mana­ging direc­tors and board mem­bers are sub­ject to an acti­ve duty to mini­mi­ze dama­ges — based on Sec­tion 43 (1) of the Ger­man Limi­t­ed Lia­bi­li­ty Com­pa­nies Act (GmbH-Gesetz ) and their respon­si­bi­li­ty towards the share­hol­ders. If they breach this duty, they may be lia­ble to the com­pa­ny in accordance with § 43 Para. 2 GmbG.

Legis­la­ti­on has crea­ted clear instru­ments for the rea­liza­ti­on of receiv­a­bles in the form of con­trac­tu­al and sta­tu­to­ry pled­ges of rights. Mana­gers who want to limit per­so­nal lia­bi­li­ty risks are obli­ged to make con­sis­tent use of the­se stra­te­gic deb­tor manage­ment opti­ons — espe­ci­al­ly in the event of impen­ding pay­ment default, insol­ven­cy or chain reac­tions within the cor­po­ra­te group.

The cos­ts?

The rea­liza­ti­on of claims through con­trac­tu­al and sta­tu­to­ry pled­ges of rights is basi­cal­ly free of char­ge for the cre­di­tor, as the deb­tor, as the ori­gi­na­tor, must accept all cos­ts ari­sing from the pro­cee­dings. The­se cos­ts are to be off­set in the first place from the auc­tion pro­ceeds.

The publicly appoin­ted, sworn auc­tion­eer invol­ved in the liqui­da­ti­on pro­cess is sworn to inde­pen­dence and con­sci­en­tious con­duct in the pro­cee­dings. He must be eco­no­mic­al­ly inde­pen­dent of the cli­ent (the cre­di­tor). He the­r­e­fo­re recei­ves an appro­pria­te pre­mi­um from the buy­er.

Repu­ta­ble auc­tion­eers will dis­cuss the cre­di­tor’s objec­ti­ves with him. They will always point out to the cre­di­tor if the cos­ts ari­sing from the liqui­da­ti­on pro­ce­du­re are not in pro­por­ti­on to the resul­ting oppor­tu­ni­ties and bene­fits.

Legal pro­vi­si­ons — imple­men­ta­ti­on of col­la­te­ral enforce­ment:

Advan­ta­ges of invol­ving Deut­sche Pfand­ver­wer­tung in the pro­cee­dings:

Fur­ther advan­ta­ges:

You save time and money

Pro­ven pro­cess and finan­cial bene­fits

Opti­miza­ti­on of your opti­ons

Legal­ly com­pli­ant pro­ces­sing and dis­cre­ti­on

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