Without a completed purchase does not automatically mean without notary activity
The schedule of costs for the GNotKG contains under Nos. 21300 to 21304 special rules on the premature termination of the certification procedure. The processing statuses described there are significant for the classification. [BEENDIGUNG]
The article does not calculate a specific fee. It shows why the mere cancellation of the appointment is not sufficient as conclusive proof of free processing. Nor does any dispatched paper by itself establish the correctness of every claimed invoice amount.
Reconstruct the instruction from the actual communication
§29 GNotKG names as general debtors of costs, among others, clients or applicants as well as persons who have assumed the obligation to pay costs or are legally liable for them. [KOSTENSCHULDNER]
Our editorial recommendation: collect the request for the draft, related messages, any representation details and further coordination. Who actually instructed whom in whose name? A contact person, a transmitter and a client are not the same role without examination.
If an estate agent or the sales side became active, have the concrete instruction classified. The article does not claim that you are always a debtor of costs merely because of purchase interest, nor that an indirect instruction can never be significant.
Distinguish draft clause and actual assumption of costs
§30 governs additional liability of the participants in the deed and a burden of costs assumed in a notarial deed to the extent described. [URKUNDSHAFTUNG] A proposed clause in an unsigned draft must not therefore be equated unexamined with this.
However, present all declarations actually made. The question whether another party is liable for costs is not thereby answered. For advice the entire process counts and not only the last page of the draft with the word “Costs”.
Hypothetical case: the bill is rejected with an incorrect brief justification
An interested party wishes to reject the bill solely with the sentence that after all he did not buy the house. However, the draft was already processed and transmitted due to an as yet unresolved instruction communication. Which cost rule and which allocation to a person fit is open.
He therefore requests a comprehensible explanation of the bill and submits the instruction, draft dispatch and cancellation for a professional review. The example confirms neither an obligation to pay nor a particular fee assessment. It replaces the blanket rejection with the actually decisive questions.
Separate your own bill from a possible claim for reimbursement
If you think another person must reimburse you costs, that is a further legal question. Such a claim is not derived solely from the cancellation of the purchase and does not make your own invoice review superfluous.
Record as a result which instruction and processing status underlie the case, why you are addressed as debtor and how the invoice is composed. If the dispute remains, you need an appropriate review of the envisaged cost-law route. This article does not create a blanket invoice objection nor a personal payment deadline.