When searching for a deposit document it becomes apparent: the lodged savings book can no longer be found. A handover receipt and an older copy are available. The task now is to restore the legally usable documentary situation. The later question of which deposit amount is owed to whom is not decided by this.
First establish what is actually missing
Our editorial recommendation: note the bank, savings book number, name on the account, last known custody and the specific locations checked. Keep copy, handover receipt and deposit agreement together. Describe the search and any responses received factually; an empty file folder does not yet prove every required condition.
The Vienna court information expressly distinguishes a merely forgotten password from the procedure for declaring a document void. For that it refers to the bank. [WIEN] The OGH furthermore distinguishes an unfindable document from a savings book already closed after payout and, in principle, from a document held by a known third party with enforceable surrender. [OGH] Have such contradictions clarified professionally first.
Have the bank stock and your own entitlement checked
Inform the bank about the loss and ask about the protective measures and inventory information intended for the specific document. Record the confirmed response. Mere notification of loss is not filed as a judicial replacement order.
§ 3 KEG allows an application where there is a right from the document or some other legal interest. It requires the individualisation of the document and proof of loss and entitlement. [KEG] Therefore check, on the basis of the deposit agreement, custody and possible pledge, who can make the application and on what grounds. The landlord role alone is not here confirmed as an automatic right to apply or to receive payment.
Determine the court for the savings document
For savings documents issued by credit institutions § 115 paragraph 2a JN names the court of first instance in the district of the company’s registered office. Where issued independently by a branch, the alternative designated there applies. [ZUSTANDIGKEIT] Therefore establish the actual issuer. The nearest bank branch or the residential location does not alone answer this question.
The information of the Landesgericht für Zivilrechtssachen Wien describes its service route. [WIEN] It does not make that court competent for every Austrian deposit savings book. After clarification of jurisdiction have the appropriate filing route and the required documents determined. This article does not provide an application or an original form.
Follow the edict as an ongoing procedure
The KEG provides for judicial review or inquiry, a public edict and an edict period. The payment block under § 9 is tied to the events around the edict specified there; it does not begin already as a result of a telephone call described here. [KEG]
Keep file numbers, court communications, the specifically determined deadline and the next required action in an overview. New indications about the whereabouts of the savings book will be passed on. Objections or a submitted document can change the course. After expiry of the period § 11 in principle provides for a further inquiry on application; § 12 regulates the declaration of nullity. [KEG] A passed calendar entry is therefore not treated as a decision already issued.
Conclude the bank procedure with the order
§ 13 KEG allows the declaration of nullity order to take the place of the document. The entitled person can thereby assert existing rights or request a new document against surrender of the order and reimbursement of costs. [KEG] The order does not create any additional substantive entitlement to the deposit balance. [OGH]
Present the bank with the confirmed procedural status and clarify which next step fits the actual security arrangement. A new savings document and a payout are different outcomes. Document the confirmed execution and the then-existing proof of deposit. Dispute over use or retention of the deposit still requires its own examination.
A hypothetical loss case with a recognisable conclusion
A landlady does not find the savings book after reorganising files. She collects a copy, custody receipt and search status. Bank and advice clarify existence, entitlement to apply and the competent court. She pursues the court’s queries and awaits the actual order instead of already promising a new document to the tenant party.
Afterwards the further handling appropriate to the continuing security is carried out and confirmed with the bank. The process ends with a documentary situation that can be traced again. No blanket processing time, fixed fee or the payout of the entire deposit is promised thereby.