Consumer protection: Schufa problems – storage periods with different storage durations using the example of residual debt discharge – by Dr. Thomas Schulte
Many consumers contact the Schufa experts at Dr. Schulte & Team and report the following serious problem:
The insolvency proceedings have been concluded and the residual debt discharge has been granted by a decision of the insolvency court. This should mean that all is well and the former debtor believes that he can now make a fresh economic start. After all, the grant of residual debt discharge is only stored in the public portal at www.insolvenzbekanntmachungen.de for a period of 6 months and is then deleted.
Wishful thinking vs reality
A new life could begin and participation in economic life should be possible again. Unfortunately, the reality speaks a different language. The former debtor does not receive a current account with overdraft facility, a cell phone contract, an annual subscription to the public transport company and the conclusion of a new tenancy agreement may also fail.
But why? Why the Schufa entry still prevents a new start:
The reason is quite simple. The granting of residual debt discharge is stored in SCHUFA – Holding AG’s database of the former debtor’s personal data. Since the Federal Data Protection Act allows a storage period of 3 years from the date of discharge, SCHUFA Holding AG is also authorized to store the granting of residual debt discharge for a period of three years.
SCHUFA Holding AG derives its authorization from the fact that there is a need for information in business transactions and that information is only provided to contractual partners anyway. This means that the consumer concerned continues to have an entry.
What does the legislation say?
However, the Federal Data Protection Act also regulates an obligation to delete before the expiry of the limitation period under civil law. A deletion obligation is justified if the data in question – in this case the granting of residual debt discharge – is no longer required by the responsible body. A necessity is no longer seen if the assertion of claims for damages, for example, is not to be expected.
The insolvency proceedings are concluded when residual debt discharge is granted. This certifies that the debtor has made an honest effort to service their outstanding debts as best they can. However, the granting of residual debt discharge also means that all creditors involved in the insolvency proceedings can no longer assert any claims. Creditors who have reported their outstanding claims, which were the subject of the insolvency proceedings, to SCHUFA must report their claim as settled on the day the residual debt discharge is granted. These entries remain anyway and are only deleted after the third full calendar year. The creditors are served and are no longer exposed to the assertion of claims under civil law. In any case, it is not apparent why the former debtor should assert civil law claims against SCHUFA. There is simply no need to store the characteristic of the granting of residual debt discharge.
Limitation period and deletion obligation?
This means that there is an obligation to delete the data before the expiry of the limitation period under civil law, so that there is no legal basis for storing the information on the granting of residual debt discharge beyond a period of 6 months.
The Hessian Data Protection Commissioner – SCHUFA’s supervisory body – considers SCHUFA’s procedure to be lawful with regard to the storage period and does not see any violation of the Federal Data Protection Act.
The lawyers of the law firm Dr. Schulte and his team cannot understand SCHUFA’s procedure and see no justification for the storage period of three years in the provisions of the Federal Data Protection Act. Legal disputes are already being conducted before various regional courts throughout Germany.
Deletion period chaos at Schufa – 2025 update
SCHUFA Holding AG collects and processes data about consumers. This data is incorporated into a credit rating, known as a score, which can have far-reaching consequences, from the granting of loans to rental contracts and cell phone contracts. The processing of this personal data is subject to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Federal Data Protection Act (BDSG).
In principle, SCHUFA entries must be deleted after a certain period of time. The storage periods vary depending on the type of entry:
- Inquiries (e.g. for a current account) are deleted after 12 months, but only appear in credit reports for 10 days.
- Loans remain stored until the end of the third calendar year after full repayment. Loans that have been processed without disruption are deleted three years after full repayment. Repaid loans: 3 years after repayment.
- Guarantees are deleted immediately as soon as the principal debt has been settled.
- Data on the non-contractual settlement of transactions (negative entries) are deleted after 3 years if the claims have been settled. However, there is a regulation that one-off payment defaults can be deleted after 18 months under certain conditions if no further negative features occur within 100 days of the due date and the debt has been settled.
- Current and credit card accounts are deleted immediately if the account is closed by the customer.
- Retail customer accounts are deleted after 3 years.
- Data from the debtor registers of the local courts (information on assets and arrest warrant) will be deleted after 3 years. If it can be proven that the local court has deleted the entry beforehand, SCHUFA will also delete the entry early.
A key point that has contributed to the “chaos” concerns the retention period for residual debt discharge after insolvency proceedings. Previously, there was a discrepancy between the practice of SCHUFA, which stored this information for 3 years, and the public insolvency register, in which entries are deleted after just 6 months. Without waiting for the outcome of court proceedings, SCHUFA has decided to store the granting of a discharge of residual debt for only 6 months with immediate effect. All entries for residual debt discharge that were stored for longer than 6 months on the cut-off date of March 28, 2023, as well as all associated debts, should be deleted retroactively to this date after 6 months. This deletion is automatic. A ruling by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) on December 7, 2023 (case no. C-634/21) clarified that SCHUFA may not store information on residual debt discharge for longer than is permitted in the public insolvency register (generally six months).
The situation is similar with entries on payment defaults from the debtor register. In accordance with the legal assessment, credit agencies are no longer required to store such information if full satisfaction of the creditor has been proven. The Higher Regional Court of Cologne emphasized that credit agencies, which pursue the same purpose as the public debtor register, may not assert any further storage rights.
Another aspect that creates uncertainty is incorrect or unlawful entries. The experience of consumer advocates and lawyers shows that the SCHUFA database may contain errors, for example outdated addresses or out-of-date entries. Consumers must ensure that incorrect data is corrected or deleted themselves. In the case of undisputedly incorrect information, deletion can be requested at any time. If the legality of an entry is disputed, SCHUFA must block this entry until it has been clarified and may not pass it on. The burden of proof for the legality of a negative entry lies in principle with the registering agency. Court rulings have confirmed that SCHUFA bears the burden of proof for the legality of data processing.
In summary, it can be said that although the deletion periods at SCHUFA are regulated in principle, there have been legal disputes and adjustments in the past and present, particularly with regard to the storage period of residual debt discharges and entries from the debtor register in order to achieve synchronization with the public registers. In addition, the error rate in SCHUFA’s database is a problem that forces consumers to check their data themselves and, if necessary, request a deletion or correction.
It is important to know that it makes sense to check the data after the deadlines have expired, as outdated data is not always deleted automatically. In the case of unauthorized entries, there are legal options to defend yourself, including the right to erasure under Art. 17 GDPR and the involvement of supervisory authorities or legal action. Expert legal assistance, e.g. from specialized lawyers, can provide effective support in enforcing these rights.
Cologne Higher Regional Court demands immediate deletion after payment!
In its judgment of April 10, 2025 – 15 U 249/24, the Cologne Higher Regional Court ruled that SCHUFA Holding AG had violated the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
The central statement of the ruling is that SCHUFA may no longer store completed entries – i.e. fully settled claims or information on payment defaults that are or could be entered in the debtor register – for a blanket period of three years.
Instead, the court has determined that this data must be deleted immediately as soon as the creditor has reported or proven full satisfaction. This follows the statutory assessment of Section 882e (3) No. 1 ZPO for the public debtor register.
This judgment represents a change of direction in case law. In particular, the decision of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) from December 2023 (referenced as C-26/22) was decisive, according to which private credit agencies may not store information from public registers (such as the insolvency register) for longer than the registers themselves. The Higher Regional Court of Cologne has transferred this case law to entries in the debtor register, as credit agencies such as SCHUFA pursue the same purpose as the debtor register, namely to provide information on creditworthiness. The debtor’s interest in participating in economic life again after the creditors have been satisfied carries considerable weight.
The court also clarified that SCHUFA cannot rely on internal rules of conduct if these violate the GDPR. The interpretation under European law is decisive.
In addition, the Higher Regional Court of Cologne awarded the plaintiff in the specific case non-material damages in the amount of €500. The court based this on the violation of the plaintiff’s right to social standing due to the unlawful storage and transmission of the completed data, which led to negative reviews from banks and contractual partners. The amount of damages was based on the case law of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH), in particular its ruling of January 28, 2025 (VI ZR 183/22). It was emphasized that damages under Art. 82 GDPR have a compensatory function and do not serve as a deterrent or punishment, which is why the severity of the infringement alone does not determine the amount of damages.
What can Dr. Thomas Schulte do for data subjects?
- Checking the legality of SCHUFA entries: Dr. Schulte and his team offer a free initial assessment to check whether an entry is lawful and whether the legal requirements under Section 31 (2) BDSG (formerly Section 28a (1) BDSG) for a negative entry are met.
- Identifying and contesting incorrect entries: He helps data subjects to identify and challenge unauthorized or outdated entries.
- Request for deletion: Dr. Schulte can send a written request to SCHUFA or the companies that reported the entry (such as banks, telecommunications providers, debt collection companies) to delete the entry. A letter from a lawyer is often sufficient to elicit a response.
- Enforcement of the right to erasure: The lawyer assists in enforcing the legal right to erasure in accordance with Art. 17 GDPR, in particular if data has been stored unlawfully or a claim has already been settled.
- Action against unlawful threats: Dr. Schulte advises those affected not to be intimidated by threats of a SCHUFA entry by creditors or debt collection agencies, as such threats may be unlawful and even punishable under certain circumstances. He offers legal advice to clarify such situations.
- Filing an objection: He can help you to object to the processing of your data in accordance with Art. 21 GDPR.
- Applying for a temporary injunction: In urgent cases, especially if there is a threat of damage due to a negative entry (e.g. in the case of imminent financing), Dr. Schulte can act quickly and apply for an interim injunction from the competent court. It is important that the person concerned acts quickly.
- Initiation of legal proceedings: If out-of-court efforts to have entries deleted are unsuccessful, he can file a lawsuit to force the deletion of unauthorized entries in court and enforce your rights.
- Assertion of claims for damages: If you have suffered damage as a result of an unauthorized SCHUFA entry (both financial and non-material damage such as stress, insecurity or damage to your reputation), Dr. Schulte will support you in asserting claims for damages in accordance with Art. 82 GDPR. However, he points out that the assertion of non-material damages can be complex and that concrete damages beyond mere annoyance must be proven.
- Representation vis-à-vis banks and debt collection agencies: He has experience in disputes with banks, telecommunications providers and debt collection companies and can often get the other party to relent through legal pressure.
- Help with identity theft: The law firm offers the fastest possible help in cases of identity theft that have led to unlawful SCHUFA entries. This can also include action against unlawful enforcement notices.
- Correction of the score value: After successfully deleting an entry, Dr. Schulte can work to ensure that the score value is corrected accordingly.
- Advice in complex cases: In more complicated circumstances or if SCHUFA fails to respond, he offers comprehensive legal advice.
Dr. Schulte is described as an expert who knows the “mechanisms and tricks” of the registering agencies. He often works quickly and digitally to achieve the deletion of unauthorized entries, in some cases within 1 to 3 weeks. He offers nationwide representation and is available to answer legal questions about SCHUFA and data protection.
In addition, his law firm also offers advice for Polish-speaking clients. Information about his services and legal advice can also be found on his website and in blog posts.
You can contact Dr. Schulte and his team by phone at +49 (0) 30 – 22 19 220 20 or by email at dr.schulte@dr-schulte.de or law@meet-an-expert.com. The law firm is located at Malteserstraße 170, 12277 Berlin.
Summary for the quick reader
Many consumers experience considerable restrictions after the discharge of residual debt, as SCHUFA continues to store them for three years – even though the public insolvency register deletes the entries after just six months. This storage practice has massive consequences: no current account, no rental contracts, no loans. Dr. Thomas Schulte, an experienced lawyer for data protection and consumer protection, sharply criticizes this approach. In the opinion of his law firm, the extended storage contradicts the Federal Data Protection Act and the GDPR.
A ruling by the European Court of Justice (C-634/21) and the Higher Regional Court of Cologne (15 U 249/24) confirm: SCHUFA may not store completed entries and the granting of residual debt discharge for longer than public registers – i.e. for a maximum of six months. This case law forces SCHUFA to change: entries must be deleted earlier. The law firm Dr. Schulte helps those affected nationwide to have incorrect or inadmissible entries deleted, to claim damages and to correct the SCHUFA score. It also offers legal protection in cases of identity theft and unlawful threats. Particularly important: act in good time and secure evidence. A free initial assessment helps those affected to get started.
Conclusion: Anyone who is unjustifiably charged can successfully defend themselves with the help of a lawyer – for a genuine new economic start. Dr. Schulte and his team are your contacts for consumer rights, data protection and SCHUFA problems – also in Polish.
Hier ist eine Übersicht von Artikeln von Rechtsanwalt Dr. Thomas Schulte auf der Website twoj-adwokat-w-niemczech.com, die sich mit SCHUFA-Themen befassen:
📄 Artikelübersicht
- Schnelle Hilfe beim Löschen von SCHUFA-Einträgen
Dr. Schulte erläutert, wie fehlerhafte oder unrechtmäßige SCHUFA-Einträge erfolgreich gelöscht werden können, einschließlich relevanter Gerichtsurteile und Datenschutzrechte. - Was tun bei einem negativen SCHUFA-Eintrag?
Praktische Tipps und rechtliche Hinweise für den Umgang mit negativen SCHUFA-Einträgen, insbesondere für polnischsprachige Verbraucher. - Hilfe bei SCHUFA-Problemen mit einem Anwalt aus Deutschland
Ein Überblick über die Dienstleistungen von Dr. Schulte im Zusammenhang mit SCHUFA, einschließlich Bonitätsprüfung, Eintragslöschung und rechtlicher Unterstützung. - Fehlerhafter SCHUFA-Eintrag nach Identitätsdiebstahl – wie können sich Betroffene wehren?
Anleitung für Opfer von Identitätsdiebstahl, wie sie gegen unrechtmäßige SCHUFA-Einträge vorgehen können, einschließlich rechtlicher Schritte und Datenschutzrechte. - SCHUFA-Score: Alles, was Sie über Änderungen, Kritik und rechtliche Möglichkeiten wissen müssen
Informationen über die Funktionsweise des SCHUFA-Scores, Kritikpunkte und wie Verbraucher ihre Rechte wahrnehmen können. - Beratung bei SCHUFA-Problemen – Löschung in Deutschland
Ein umfassender Leitfaden zur Löschung von SCHUFA-Einträgen, einschließlich individueller Beratung und rechtlicher Unterstützung durch Dr. Schulte.
📄 Article on dr-schulte.de
- Deletion deadline chaos at SCHUFA
- Analysis of the unclear legal regulations on deletion periods for SCHUFA entries and their impact on consumer rights.
- Schufa scoring: The secret formula that decides your life
- Insight into SCHUFA’s non-transparent scoring methods and their impact on consumers.
- Schufa scoring at 100? Secrets, challenges and an overview
- Explanation of Schufa scoring, its significance and how consumers can improve their creditworthiness.
- Schufa universe – curse and blessing
- Discussion about the role of SCHUFA in the networked world and tips on how to handle personal data.
- Arbitrariness by Schufa? The interpretation of Art. 21 GDPR
- Examination of the application of Article 21 GDPR in the context of SCHUFA and consumer rights.
- Out-of-court success! Schufa deletes entry of Fidor Bank
- Report on an out-of-court success in the deletion of a SCHUFA entry of Fidor Bank.
- Despite residual debt discharge – Schufa entry of EON Energie Deutschland GmbH ensures bad credit rating
- Case study on the effects of a SCHUFA entry despite residual debt discharge.
📰 Article on drthomasschulte.de
- Reputational damage caused by Schufa – report telephone contracts
- Discussion about the effects of SCHUFA entries in connection with telephone contracts on the reputation of consumers.
- Schufa – More power than the mother-in-law
- An entertaining but critical look at SCHUFA’s influence in everyday life.
- Deleting Schufa entries – wishes of all kinds from those affected
- Discussion of the possibilities and limits of deleting SCHUFA entries.
🎥 YouTube videos
- The power of Schufa and how to deal with negative entries
- In this video, Dr. Thomas Schulte explains the effects of negative SCHUFA entries and gives practical tips on how to deal with them.
- 1001 stories of the Schufa | Dr. Thomas Schulte #schufa #credit #shorts
- Short video in which Dr. Schulte tells an anecdote about SCHUFA and points out the importance of creditworthiness.
- ABOWI Law YouTube channel
- The official YouTube channel of ABOWI Law, where Dr. Thomas Schulte regularly publishes videos on legal topics, including SCHUFA.
These resources provide comprehensive information and legal assessments on how to deal with SCHUFA entries. Website: www.dr-schulte.de
- E-mail: dr.schulte@dr-schulte.de
- Phone: +49 (0) 30 – 22 19 220 20
The law firm is located at Malteserstraße 170, 12277 Berlin, and offers nationwide representation.