Online coaching offered without ZFU certification may be void under the German Distance Learning Protection Act, meaning amounts paid can be reclaimed and outstanding instalments are not enforceable. The BGH ruling III ZR 137/25 (February 2026) has narrowed this: synchronous live coaching with real-time interaction generally does not fall under FernUSG. What matters is the actual format of the programme.
Run the 2-minute check →Three BGH rulings shape the current case law. III ZR 176/23 (September 2023) confirmed that even contracts with entrepreneurs fall within the scope of FernUSG. III ZR 109/24 (June 2025) extended the application to structured online coaching programmes where knowledge is transferred and learning success is monitored.
III ZR 137/25 (February 2026) narrowed this line. Synchronous live coaching with a real opportunity to interact with the coach is no longer considered distance learning, and the contract remains valid even without ZFU certification.
The advisory situation has shifted accordingly. A blanket "coaching contract void, get your money back" is no longer tenable. Anyone considering a refund first needs to determine which format their contract falls into.
Predominantly pre-recorded modules with learning-success monitoring, no ZFU certification — still within scope of FernUSG. The contract is typically void; payments can be reclaimed.
Synchronous live calls with real Q&A — no longer covered by FernUSG after 137/25. The contract remains valid; a FernUSG-based refund claim is unavailable. Other levers (defects, withdrawal, termination) may apply case by case.
Mixed format with significant recorded content or pacing constraints — requires individual assessment. The decisive question is whether the recorded portion is substantial enough to define the character of the programme.
At eastkap.de/check a seven-question form determines which constellation your contract falls into. You see at the end whether a refund is likely, whether the format puts you in the 137/25 line, or whether an individual assessment is needed. Two minutes, anonymous, no email required.
If the self-assessment shows refund indicators, we take over the legal work — contract analysis, format evidence, payment history, statute of limitations, ZFU status of the provider. In the success case, paid amounts are recovered; outstanding instalments and the provider's collection demands are contested.
With legal expenses insurance, the insurer typically covers our fees — out-of-pocket cost zero. Without insurance, we agree a fair flat fee before the mandate begins; the amount depends on workload and dispute value and is fixed in writing.
The standard limitation period for FernUSG refund claims is three years from knowledge of the relevant circumstances. For many clients the clock starts only with knowledge of the relevant BGH case law. In doubt: assessment instead of waiting.
If the contract is void, further instalments are not owed. The provider's collection demands can be contested. For active SEPA debits we assist with withdrawal and reclaim.
That is the standard defence, often citing the live-call format. After 137/25 this is correct in some cases — but not where there is significant recorded content or pacing structure. Assessment of the actual contract is decisive, not the provider's statement.
The self-assessment via eastkap.de/check is free. The subsequent legal review runs against our standard fee — zero out-of-pocket with insurance, otherwise a fixed fee agreed after the initial conversation.
If the self-assessment shows refund indicators, we take over the legal work. Write to us with your key data — we will respond with concrete suggestions on how to proceed.
Daniel Wagner, Attorney at Law
Kiehlufer 9
12059 Berlin