Objection to the contribution notice

One month from notification of the notice – so provides § 70 Abs. 1 Satz 1 VwGO. Two misunderstandings regularly cost people this legal remedy: the deadline does not run from the day on which you opened the letter, and not from a later payment reminder – what matters is notification of the notice itself. Anyone who was travelling loses those days. The consequence of missing it is harsh: a late objection is rejected as inadmissible, and that also makes a later legal action inadmissible – the substance of the matter is then no longer decided. If missing the deadline was not your fault, for example because of a hospital stay, a restoration of the status quo ante may be possible; in that case, act immediately and enclose evidence.

No – and this is the most common formal error. The official information is unambiguous: “Lodging a legally effective objection by simple email is not possible. An objection by telephone is likewise inadmissible.” Permitted are the written objection and the objection on the record at the authority; a De-Mail with a qualified signature is also accepted. In practice, this means: a letter, ideally as a registered letter (Einschreiben). The postage is money well spent, because under a cut-off period you bear the risk of receipt – without proof, it cannot be shown later that, and when, your objection arrived. Anyone who tries to meet the deadline with an email has, as a rule, missed it.

Yes, and the reasoning is worth knowing, because it shows both the rule and the exception. § 80 Abs. 1 VwGO first sets out the principle: “An objection and a rescissory action have suspensive effect.” But Abs. 2 Nr. 1 excludes from this the “demand for public levies and costs” – and the Rundfunkbeitrag is such a levy. For you, that means: the objection neither defers the due date nor halts enforcement. Anyone who stops paying accumulates arrears, on which a late-payment penalty of 1% (at least €8.00) is charged after four weeks, and risks attachment of their bank account – even if they are ultimately proven right. So keep paying: if you succeed, everything is refunded.

With factual, provable arguments against your notice. Four in particular are promising: you were not liable to pay the contribution in the period in question – for example because the home had been deregistered or another person was paying for it; an exemption or reduction had already been granted; the contribution had already been paid, which you show with proof of payment; or an exemption application was refused despite the evidence provided. In each case, the evidence is decisive – without it, it remains an assertion. Hopeless, by contrast, are arguments directed against the contribution as such: criticism of the programming, lack of use, no receiving device, or constitutionality. The latter has been settled by the highest courts, and the contribution being independent of any device is precisely what is intended.

Less than the flat figures circulating online suggest – which is why none is given here. § 52 Abs. 3 GKG provides: “If the plaintiff's application concerns a specified monetary payment or an administrative act relating to it, its amount is decisive.” The value in dispute is therefore the amount in dispute under your notice, and not a flat default value – for a notice concerning a few hundred euros, the court fees turn out correspondingly low. The exact figure depends on your case; the Rechtsantragstelle (legal application office) of the Verwaltungsgericht gives information on this free of charge. On a low income, Prozesskostenhilfe (legal aid) may be available, and Beratungshilfe (advisory assistance) for advice beforehand. Do not let exaggerated cost figures stop you from pursuing a justified argument.

To the body named in the Rechtsbehelfsbelehrung of your notice – which is more authoritative than any general information. Legally, the objection is directed against the Landesrundfunkanstalt that issued the notice: under § 10 Abs. 5 RBStV, outstanding contributions “are assessed by the competent Landesrundfunkanstalt”, that is, by the WDR, BR, NDR, SWR, MDR and the others. The Beitragsservice accepts the objection, but under § 10 Abs. 7 RBStV it is only a “non-incorporated public-law administrative association” with no legal personality of its own – no legal action is brought against it. In every case, state your contribution number, the date of the notice and the file reference, so that your letter can be matched to your file.

Yes, that is a peculiarity which does not exist everywhere in this form. Anyone who receives a notice from the Bayerischer Rundfunk can choose: either to lodge an objection or to bring legal action before the Verwaltungsgericht directly. In the other federal states, the objection is, as a rule, the preliminary and necessary step. Do not rely on this general description, however, but on the Rechtsbehelfsbelehrung of your own notice – it states the permissible legal remedy, the deadline and the body. For the choice itself: the objection is free of charge and can lead to the matter being remedied without a court being involved; direct legal action skips a step, but costs court fees. In both cases, the obligation to pay continues.

In that case, you receive a Widerspruchsbescheid (ruling on the objection), and from its service a further deadline of one month runs for the rescissory action before the Verwaltungsgericht. This legal action, too, has no suspensive effect because of § 80 Abs. 2 Nr. 1 VwGO – the contribution remains due, and enforcement can proceed in parallel. If you want to prevent that, an additional application for an order of suspensive effect under § 80 Abs. 5 VwGO would be needed; whether it has any prospect depends on the individual case and should be assessed by a professional. Before bringing the action, consider soberly whether your argument is factual in nature and provable – bringing an action against the contribution as such is hopeless and causes only costs.