Overview
In wire transfer fraud, perpetrators get their victims to carry out a transfer themselves. Typical examples are invoices with an exchanged IBAN, fake shops that only accept advance payment, shock calls from alleged relatives or police officers, and messages in which someone pretends to be a child or superior. The money ends up in someone else's account and is usually quickly forwarded from there.
Legally, this situation is more difficult than third-party access to the account. If you have approved the transfer yourself, it is generally considered authorized - even if you were deceived. There is then generally no claim for reimbursement from your own bank under Section 675u of the German Civil Code (BGB). We tell you this openly because it is important for a realistic assessment of your case.
That doesn't mean that there are no starting points. This includes the recall of the transfer, claims against the holder of the recipient account and - in exceptional cases - claims against the banks involved. We also check whether the payment was actually authorized by you or whether the perpetrators initiated it themselves remotely.
Immediate steps
These steps make sense in most cases – regardless of whether you instruct us.
Report the transaction to your bank and ask for a transfer recall and to contact the recipient bank. Success is not certain because funds are often withdrawn quickly - but it still makes sense to try.
If you have disclosed access data or installed software in connection with the incident, have your online banking and cards blocked - via your bank or the blocking emergency number 116 116 - and change your passwords.
Back up invoices, emails including headers, chat histories, shop pages, order confirmations and call lists. In the case of manipulated invoices, the original invoice from the actual sender is also important.
File a police report and provide the recipient IBAN. The investigation can clarify who is the owner of the recipient account.
Do not transfer any additional money, including for alleged fees, taxes or “return services”. Anyone who promises to get your money back if you pay in advance is often one of the same perpetrators.
Unsure what to do first in your case?
Legal assessment
We first clarify who actually initiated the transfer. If you have released it yourself, a claim under Section 675u of the German Civil Code (BGB) is fundamentally excluded. However, if perpetrators traded with your data or via remote access, the payment may not have been authorized - with significantly more favorable legal consequences.
We check whether and when a callback was attempted, how the recipient bank reacted and whether there was still funds in the recipient account. However, there is no claim that the recall will be successful.
Claims for unjust enrichment and tortious acts may be brought against the holder of the recipient account. This also applies to financial agents who have made their account available - depending on what they are accused of.
Banks are generally allowed to carry out transfers using the IBAN. Only in exceptional cases, for example in the case of objectively serious suspicions, is an obligation to warn possible. We also check whether the recipient name and IBAN were compared and what information was displayed to you.
If bank details are exchanged, the additional question arises as to whether the real creditor's claim still exists and who bears the risk of manipulation. This depends, among other things, on whose sphere the attack took place.
Who may be liable
Claims against the account holder can be considered if they can be identified. Whether a claim can be enforced economically depends on its ability to pay.
In the case of self-authorized transfers, your own bank is generally not liable for reimbursement. Claims can only be considered if the payment was not authorized or, in exceptional cases, warning and protection obligations were breached.
Liability of the recipient bank can only be considered under strict conditions, for example if it has remained inactive despite concrete and massive evidence of misuse of the account.
If the invoice has been manipulated within the sender's area of responsibility, this can affect whether and to what extent you have to pay again. This is also a question of the individual case.
In principle, there are claims for damages against the perpetrators. They can only be implemented if the investigation leads to an identifiable person.
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.
This depends on the individual case, and the legal options are narrower for transfers made by yourself than for third-party access to the account. There is generally no legal claim to reimbursement from your own bank. We check whether there are other starting points - we cannot give a guarantee.
Once a transfer has been made, it cannot be reversed unilaterally. Your bank can ask the receiving bank to return it; This is usually only possible if the money is still in the recipient's account and it can be returned there. That's why it makes sense to report early.
The defense of gross negligence only plays a legal role in the case of unauthorized payments. The first thing to clarify is whether you approved the transfer yourself or whether third parties acted. In the second case, we check whether the bank's accusation is based on the specific circumstances.
Banks do not regularly disclose this information directly due to banking secrecy. The account holder is often identified from the investigation file, which a lawyer can request access to on behalf of the injured party.
The initial assessment of your request is free of charge. We will inform you transparently in advance about all further costs - especially in constellations with an open outcome, we will discuss with you whether further action appears to make economic sense.
Knowledge centre
Payments
· Manfred Kühn
Once a transfer has been made, it cannot be easily canceled. What avenues there are after fraud - from a callback to the recipient bank to claims against the account holder.
Banks
· Manfred Kühn
Banks generally carry out transfers without checking the content. Only in exceptional cases do they have to warn customers of impending damage. A classification of the requirements.
Warnings
· Manfred Kühn
First there is closeness, then the tip for a supposedly safe crypto investment follows. How this form of love scam works, how to recognize it and what steps are available to those affected.
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.