Home seller does not pay his notary fees!

I see it a bit differently; the notary primarily wants to have his invoice settled. From whom is actually irrelevant to him if your wish is to keep the upcoming procedure manageable. In the end, you will surely have to bear the costs of debt collection - voki? - if the debtor has no funds. In the case of an assumed forced sale, it is not uncommon that the purchase price has already been passed on.

My view: talk to the notary, yesterday

Rhine greetings from the road

If the notary's invoice is paid, then the collection efforts are pointless. Of course, one can also "withdraw" a dunning notice, even if the costs may still be incurred in full.

Naturally, the purchaser liable jointly and severally also pays for the costs of these measures.

I would ask the notary for the payment transaction details and transfer the outstanding amount. At the same time, I would inform the seller of the payment made and urge him to pay. If this deadline expires without result, I would apply for a dunning notice and wait to see if the seller is too lazy to file an objection. If so, after the objection period has expired, one would have a judgment.

Far too small an amount for so much stress. But it is clear that such things are quite annoying. Nevertheless, I wouldn’t let it give me gray hair (by now it would be too late anyway).

so they already covered lawyer fees for the purchase at that time

I don’t understand this sentence and can’t make any reasonable connection from it. Why should the legal expenses insurance cover attorney fees for a purchase contract? Was there a dispute? If yes, was the prospect of winning so high that the legal expenses insurance provided coverage? What exactly is behind this statement?

I do not understand this sentence and cannot bring it into any reasonable context. Why should the legal expenses insurance cover the attorney fees for a purchase contract? Was there a dispute? If yes, was the prospect of winning so high that the legal expenses insurance provided coverage? What exactly is behind this statement?

Um, yes. That’s what happens when you write in a hurry.

After the handover of the apartment, we had a few small disputes, which I cannot go into here in detail. In this context, we used our legal protection insurance for legal advice, which was also paid for. The costs would also have been covered for a subsequent lawsuit, but this did not occur. In our case, it was treated as ordinary contract law and covered without a special real estate law option. The prospects of success were not entirely clear because there were different rulings on the matter.

The initial legal consultation is often "also taken on like that." It offers the person making the inquiry the opportunity to assess the cost-benefit analysis. At the same time, it gives the insurance company an outlook on the chances of success. A verbal willingness to cover costs should always be followed by a written coverage confirmation. The former is often "advertising" and is sometimes not to be taken too seriously.

We have received written confirmation of the cost coverage. But as I said, we did not need it.