Overview
Investment fraud takes many forms: alleged fixed-term deposits or overnight money offers with noticeably high interest rates, investments in companies or projects that do not exist, pre-IPO shares, precious metal or real estate models, and pyramid schemes in which distributions come from the money of new investors. Contact often occurs through comparison sites, advertisements, calls or recommendations from friends.
The providers appear professional, use high-quality documents and sometimes names that are similar to well-known institutes. Smaller amounts are sometimes paid out initially to create trust. The fact that something is wrong often only becomes apparent when interest is not paid, a cancellation is not processed or the provider is no longer available.
Whoever designed the system is usually inaccessible to those affected or is based abroad; Enforcement directly against these people is therefore often difficult. A legal review therefore also focuses on other parties involved – such as intermediaries, account holders or payment service providers. Which claims actually exist depends on the circumstances of the individual case.
Immediate steps
These steps make sense in most cases – regardless of whether you instruct us.
Do not pay any more – neither to “secure” the existing investment nor for fees, taxes or a supposed withdrawal release. Do not sign any new agreements for the time being either.
Inform your bank promptly and ask about the possibility of recalling the transfer. Whether a recall succeeds depends, among other things, on whether the money is still in the recipient's account.
Keep contracts, prospectuses, advertising material, emails and payment receipts in full. Take screenshots of the website and of any customer portal while they are still accessible.
Check BaFin's company database and its warning notices. Consumer advice centres also provide information on known schemes. The result helps with classification but does not replace a legal assessment.
A report can be filed at any police station or via the online police portal. If there are other victims, pooled investigations can yield additional information about those responsible and about money flows.
Unsure what to do first in your case?
Legal assessment
If you were deceived about the investment, its risks or the use of the money, claims under Section 823(2) of the German Civil Code (BGB) in conjunction with Section 263 of the German Criminal Code (StGB) and under Section 826 BGB may be available. Depending on the structure, capital investment fraud (Section 264a StGB) may also play a role.
Deposit-taking, investment brokerage and many other activities require a licence under the German Banking Act (KWG) or the German Investment Firms Act (WpIG); a prospectus is also required for numerous investment products. We examine whether these requirements were breached and which claims may arise as a result.
If the investment was recommended by an intermediary or adviser, we examine whether they checked the offer for plausibility with due care and provided accurate information about the risks. In the event of breaches of duty, damages may be claimed.
We examine whether a credit institution involved breached warning or due-diligence duties in the individual case, for example where there were specific, recognisable grounds for suspicion. Such liability is subject to strict requirements.
If the money was transferred to third-party accounts, claims for unjust enrichment or in tort may exist against the account holders. If the provider is insolvent, filing claims in the insolvency proceedings may also come into consideration.
Who may be liable
The company behind the offer, its managing directors and those behind it may be liable. However, if they cannot be identified, have no assets or are based abroad, enforcement is often difficult.
Whoever recommended or brokered the investment may be liable if duties of examination or disclosure were breached. Intermediaries are frequently based in Germany and known by name.
The holders of the accounts into which your payments flowed may be liable for repayment or damages – depending on the role they played and what they knew or should have recognised.
In individual cases, an institution involved may also be liable if there were specific indications of misuse that went unheeded. This must always be examined separately.
Whether and against whom claims actually exist depends on the individual case and can only be assessed after reviewing the documents.
Preserve evidence
Do not delete anything – not even out of anger or shame. Your account of events is enough for the initial enquiry; documents can be submitted later.
Our approach
Using the form, you describe to us in a few minutes what happened. You can submit documents later.
We review your details, classify the facts and examine against whom claims may be available.
You receive an honest assessment of prospects, risks and costs – and decide for yourself whether to instruct us.
We implement the agreed strategy: towards banks, payment service providers and other parties involved, and in court if necessary.
FAQ
General guidance – it does not replace advice on your individual case.
That depends on the individual case – in particular on which parties involved can be identified and whether they have assets. There is no guarantee. We assess the possible claims and discuss openly with you which steps appear economically sensible.
The initial assessment of your enquiry is free of charge for you. Before any further costs arise, we inform you transparently. Any legal expenses insurance may cover part of the costs depending on your policy; this can be clarified in the individual case.
There is no single reliable indicator. Clear warning signs are very high returns with supposedly low risk, time pressure, missing prospectuses, a missing licence and payments to third-party or foreign accounts. A look at BaFin's company database and warning notices is a sensible first step.
Yes. Early payouts or interest payments are deliberately used in fraudulent schemes to build trust and secure larger follow-up investments. In Ponzi schemes, they come from the deposits of other investors. The legal assessment depends on the overall picture.
Yes. The standard limitation period is three years and generally begins at the end of the year in which the claim arose and you became aware of the relevant circumstances. In addition, maximum periods apply regardless of knowledge. When the period runs in your case must be examined individually.
Knowledge centre
Platforms
· Manfred Kühn
On August 10, 2026, the Austrian Financial Market Authority warned against offers from “Quantum AI” – distributed via a website whose address has nothing to do with the brand name. What is proven is why similar names should not be equated and what steps those affected should consider.
Platforms
· Manfred Kühn
On August 21, 2026, the FMA warned against offers from capital equity markets. The provider stated locations in London, Berlin and Vienna. What the authority has published and what steps those affected should check now.
Platforms
· Manfred Kühn
On August 25, 2026, the FMA warned against offers from primary markets (primary-markets.com). The provider named locations in all three DACH countries. What is proven is what this means for investors in Germany and what steps those affected should consider.
Case review
We will assess which claims may be available and which next steps may make sense.
Your details are treated in confidence. An enquiry does not yet establish a client relationship.
By telephone, by email or via the case review – in confidence and initially without obligation.