AmtsDeutschland
0%
Skip to main content
Authorities Most popular Guides
FAQ Contact
Find an official procedure

Having a SCHUFA entry deleted

§ 31 Abs. 2 of the Federal Data Protection Act (Bundesdatenschutzgesetz, BDSG) — first check whether it was lawful at all

In writingFree of charge

The first step is not the request for deletion, but the check – because a considerable proportion of negative entries should never have come into being, and what helps against that is not a friendly letter, but a statutory provision.

Before you ask for deletion, check whether the entry was admissible at all. § 31 Abs. 2 BDSG allows a debt to be taken into account in fact only in five cases: if it has been established by a final judgment, or one declared provisionally enforceable, or an enforceable title (Schuldtitel) exists under § 794 ZPO; if it was established in insolvency proceedings under § 178 InsO and not disputed at the examination hearing (Prüfungstermin); if the debtor “has expressly acknowledged” it; if a termination without notice for payment arrears would be possible and prior notice was given; or – and this is the usual case in consumer matters – if the debtor “was sent at least two written payment reminders”, the first reminder “dates back at least four weeks”, they were given prior notice of the impending report, and they “have not disputed the debt”.

Go through this list point by point. If the second reminder was missing, if fewer than four weeks lay between them, if you were not given prior notice – or if you have disputed the debt – then the entry was not permitted to arise at all. That is no longer a request for goodwill, but an entitlement backed by a statutory provision.

If, on the other hand, the entry came about lawfully, the only remaining question is the deletion period. And that has recently been clarified by the highest court – unfortunately differently from what most guides say.

There has recently been clarity on storage periods, and it is different from what most people hope. By judgment of 18 December 2025 (I ZR 97/25), the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) ruled that reported data on payment defaults does not have to be deleted immediately after the debt is settled – unlike entries in the public register of debtors (Schuldnerverzeichnis). Under the code of conduct approved by the supervisory authority: three years applies as the basic period from settlement, and 18 months only where three conditions together are met – settlement took place within 100 days of the report, no further negative data was added, and there is no entry in the register of debtors.

The widespread claim that anyone who pays within 100 days is deleted immediately is therefore wrong: the 100 days lead to 18 months, not to zero. Under the same judgment, a shorter period comes into consideration only “exceptionally”, if you can demonstrate a particularly strong interest in deletion – that is a balancing exercise in the individual case, not an automatic rule.

Last updated27 August 2026
Legal basis§ 31 BDSG · Article 17 GDPR (DSGVO) · Article 19 GDPR
VerificationChecked against the consolidated text of the BDSG and the GDPR (DSGVO), and against the rulings of the Court of Justice of the European Union (EuGH) and the Federal Court of Justice (BGH)
Written and reviewed byAndrés Sánchez Botta
Independent information site: we are not SCHUFA, not an authority and not a paid advice service — we do not submit applications on your behalf. All information comes from official sources and is explained here in plain terms; the competent body is always authoritative. This is not legal advice. Whether an entry must be deleted depends on the individual case. All information provided without guarantee. We are neither lawyers nor tax consultants: we document administrative procedures and check the information against the official source — this is information, not legal or tax advice.
Check first§ 31 Abs. 2 BDSGWas it lawful at all?
Debt settledThree years18 months under three conditions
Discharge of residual debtSix monthsEuGH C-26/22 and C-64/22
Costs€0.00The complaint too
Required documents

What you need

The free data copy (Datenkopie)

Without it you do not know exactly what is stored – and a request for deletion that does not identify the entry precisely will not be processed. Note the date, amount and reporting company of each entry you are concerned about.

All the payment reminders you received

The decisive piece of evidence for the checklist. § 31 Abs. 2 Nr. 4 BDSG requires at least two written reminders and a gap of at least four weeks since the first one. Count them – if you only received one, a requirement is missing.

Your correspondence with the creditor

Particularly important: anything showing that you disputed the debt. Because the same number requires that the debtor “has not disputed the debt” – anyone who objected should not have been reported.

The dated proof of payment

It determines the deletion period. For the shortened 18-month storage period, settlement must have taken place within 100 days of the report – and for that you need both dates: the date of the report from the data copy, and the date of your payment.

In insolvency: the order granting discharge of residual debt

With a date. Under the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union (EuGH) of 7 December 2023 (C-26/22 and C-64/22), the information must not be stored any longer than in the public insolvency register – and there it is deleted after six months.

Step by step

How to proceed

  1. 1

    Check lawfulness first, not the deletion period

    Go through the five alternatives in § 31 Abs. 2 BDSG before you write anything. If the second reminder was missing, if there were not four weeks in between, if you were not notified beforehand, or if you had disputed the debt – then the entry was unlawful from the outset, and it is not a matter of deletion periods but of immediate deletion.

  2. 2

    Work out the deletion period if the entry was lawful

    Under the judgment of the Federal Court of Justice (BGH) of 18 December 2025, three years from settlement applies – and 18 months only if all three conditions are met: settlement within 100 days of the report, no further negative data, no entry in the register of debtors.

  3. 3

    In the case of discharge of residual debt, assert the six-month period

    A special rule applies here. The Court of Justice of the European Union (EuGH) has ruled that private credit reporting agencies (Auskunftei) must not store this information for longer than the public insolvency register – and there it is six months. Refer expressly to the ruling of 7 December 2023 in cases C-26/22 and C-64/22.

  4. 4

    Request deletion in writing, with reasons

    Rely on Article 17 GDPR (DSGVO) and state the reason: either the missing requirement under § 31 Abs. 2 BDSG, or the expiry of the deletion period. Identify the entry by date, amount and reporting company, and set a deadline of two weeks.

  5. 5

    Write to the creditor in parallel

    It was not SCHUFA that made the report, but the company. If it withdraws the report, the entry disappears – often faster than the credit reporting agency can clarify facts that it does not even know itself. Write to both at the same time and refer to the other letter in each.

  6. 6

    Request notification of all recipients

    Under Article 19 GDPR (DSGVO), the deletion must be communicated to “each recipient to whom the personal data have been disclosed”. Insist on this expressly – otherwise the wrong picture remains with the banks that have already retrieved the entry, and you will never find out the reason for the next refusal.

  7. 7

    If refused: the supervisory authority, free of charge

    If it stands by its refusal, lodge a complaint with the data protection supervisory authority under Article 77 GDPR (DSGVO) – the one for your place of residence. This costs nothing, needs no lawyer, and is the most effective lever you have. One clarification up front, because it shapes the whole route: SCHUFA Holding AG is not an authority, but a private-sector company. Two things follow from that. There is no objection (Widerspruch) in the administrative-law sense and no action before an administrative court (Verwaltungsgericht) – your rights are those of the General Data Protection Regulation (Datenschutz-Grundverordnung, DSGVO), and they apply against every company. And if SCHUFA does not respond, your point of contact is the data protection supervisory authority: Article 77 GDPR (DSGVO) lets you lodge a complaint where you live or work – so you do not have to approach the authority at SCHUFA's registered office in Hesse, even though that authority counts as the lead supervisory authority.

Fee information

Costs and payment

Deadlines and costsWhy “paid within 100 days = deleted immediately” is not correct
Check and request for deletion€0.00
Complaint to the supervisory authority€0.00
Unlawful entryDeletion without waiting for the period to expire
Debt settled, basic periodThree years
Shortened, under three conditions18 months
Discharge of residual debtSix months
Lawyer, if desiredBeratungshilfe €15.00

There has recently been clarity on storage periods, and it is different from what most people hope. By judgment of 18 December 2025 (I ZR 97/25), the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof, BGH) ruled that reported data on payment defaults does not have to be deleted immediately after the debt is settled – unlike entries in the public register of debtors (Schuldnerverzeichnis). Under the code of conduct approved by the supervisory authority: three years applies as the basic period from settlement, and 18 months only where three conditions together are met – settlement took place within 100 days of the report, no further negative data was added, and there is no entry in the register of debtors.

The widespread claim that anyone who pays within 100 days is deleted immediately is therefore wrong: the 100 days lead to 18 months, not to zero. Under the same judgment, a shorter period comes into consideration only “exceptionally”, if you can demonstrate a particularly strong interest in deletion – that is a balancing exercise in the individual case, not an automatic rule.

For your planning, that means: do not count on a quick payment making the entry disappear immediately – at best it shortens it from three years to 18 months, and even that only if the two further conditions are met. There is, however, one exception, and it is the more important one: if the entry was unlawful from the outset because the requirements of § 31 Abs. 2 BDSG were not met, deletion periods do not matter at all – it must then be deleted, regardless of how long it has already stood. That is why the checklist comes at the start of this page, not at the end. Finally, a separate rule applies to discharge of residual debt: under the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European Union of 7 December 2023 (C-26/22 and C-64/22), private credit reporting agencies must not store it for longer than the public insolvency register, and there it is deleted after six months. All the steps – checking, requesting deletion, complaining to the supervisory authority – are free of charge. If you want legal help, Beratungshilfe (advisory assistance for people on low incomes) may be available if your income is low: under Nr. 2500 VV RVG, the personal contribution is €15.00, and that provision expressly states that the fee “may be waived”.

Good to know

Important notes

Check lawfulness first, not the deletion period. An unlawful entry must be deleted regardless of its age.

Two reminders, four weeks, advance notice — and no disputed debt. If one is missing, the report should not have been made.

“Paid within 100 days = deleted immediately” is wrong. The 100 days lead to 18 months, not to zero.

The 18 months require three conditions together, not just quick payment (BGH, 18 December 2025).

Discharge of residual debt: six months, not three years — EuGH C-26/22 and C-64/22.

Always write to the creditor too. A withdrawal by them often works faster.

Request notification of all recipients (Article 19 GDPR, DSGVO), or the error keeps having an effect at banks.

A complaint to the supervisory authority is free of charge and goes to the authority for your place of residence.

Avoid these mistakes

Common mistakes

Asking for deletion without checking lawfulness. You are giving away the strongest argument you have.

Hoping for immediate deletion after payment. The BGH rejected exactly that on 18 December 2025.

Only proving the quick payment. For the 18 months, all three conditions must be met together.

Accepting three years for a discharge of residual debt. Six months — and the EuGH has ruled on it.

Not mentioning the disputed debt. Under § 31 Abs. 2 Nr. 4, that is exactly what matters.

Writing only to SCHUFA. It was the creditor who made the report; writing to both in parallel is faster.

Doing nothing further after deletion. Without Article 19, the information stays with the recipients.

Frequently asked questions

Questions and answers

When must an entry be deleted?

Two quite different cases, and the first is the stronger one. First: the entry was unlawful from the outset. § 31 Abs. 2 BDSG permits a debt to be reported in only five situations, and the one usual in consumer matters requires “at least two written reminders”, a gap of “at least four weeks” since the first reminder, prior notice of the impending report, and that you “have not disputed the debt”. If one of these is missing, the entry must be deleted regardless of its age. Second: the entry was lawful, but the deletion period has expired – see the next question for that.

I paid quickly — will the entry be deleted immediately?

No, and this widespread piece of advice has been clearly disproved since December 2025. The Federal Court of Justice (BGH) ruled on 18 December 2025 (I ZR 97/25) that reported data on payment defaults does not have to be deleted immediately after settlement – unlike entries in the public register of debtors. Under the approved code of conduct, a basic period of three years applies; it shortens to 18 months only where three conditions together are present: settlement within 100 days of the report, no further negative data, and no entry in the register of debtors. So the “100-day rule” leads to 18 months, not to zero.

What applies after a discharge of residual debt?

Here the legal position is markedly more favourable for those affected, and many people do not know it. The Court of Justice of the European Union (EuGH) ruled on 7 December 2023, in the joined cases C-26/22 and C-64/22, that it is contrary to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) for private credit reporting agencies to store information about a granted discharge of residual debt for longer than the public insolvency register. There, the entry is deleted after six months. The earlier practice of storing it for three years is therefore no longer valid. Refer expressly to this ruling in your letter – and do not confuse it with the other ruling from the same day (C-634/21), which concerns scoring.

How do I know whether I was reminded twice?

From your own records – and if you are unsure, ask the creditor about it. That is expressly permitted and often revealing: you can require the reporting company to set out when it sent reminders and when it notified you of the impending report, because it must be able to prove exactly these circumstances for the report to be lawful. In doing so, check three things separately: were there really two written reminders? Were there at least four weeks between the first reminder and the report? And were you notified beforehand about the report? If one is missing, name it specifically – a precise objection carries more weight than a general one.

I objected to the debt — does that matter?

A decisive one, and it is almost always overlooked. § 31 Abs. 2 Nr. 4 BDSG expressly requires, for the report usual in consumer matters, that the debtor “has not disputed the debt”. So if you disputed the debt – in writing, verifiably, before the report – you should not have been reported by this route at all. That applies regardless of whether your dispute was ultimately justified: the provision turns on the disputing itself, not on its outcome. So search your correspondence specifically for the letter in which you objected, and enclose it. It is often the single most effective document.

Should I write to SCHUFA or to the creditor?

Both, at the same time. SCHUFA did not create the entry – the reporting company did, and only that company knows the facts. If it withdraws the report, the entry is removed, and in practice that is often faster than having the credit reporting agency carry out a check, which first has to ask the creditor. So write to both in parallel: to SCHUFA, the request for deletion under Article 17 GDPR (DSGVO) with your reasons; to the creditor, the demand to withdraw the report, with the same evidence. Mention the other letter in each one. And set the same deadline for both, so that you keep track.

The entry is gone — is that enough?

Not quite, and the missing step sometimes costs you the next loan approval. Article 19 GDPR (DSGVO) obliges the controller to “communicate the rectification or erasure … to each recipient to whom the personal data have been disclosed” – unless this would be impossible or involve disproportionate effort. Demand this expressly, and at the same time demand that they tell you who received the data. Otherwise it can happen that the entry has disappeared at SCHUFA while the bank that retrieved it three weeks earlier keeps working with the old information – and you never learn the reason for the refusal, because it does not have to be justified.

What if SCHUFA refuses the deletion?

Then two free routes remain open to you, and both work without a lawyer. SCHUFA maintains an ombudsman office (Ombudsstelle) as out-of-court conciliation. Independently of that – and independently of its outcome – you can lodge a complaint with the data protection supervisory authority under Article 77 GDPR (DSGVO), namely the one for your place of residence; you do not have to approach the authority at the company's registered office. Enclose your entire correspondence and state precisely which requirement of § 31 Abs. 2 BDSG you believe was missing. If you also want legal help, Beratungshilfe may be available if your income is low – a personal contribution of €15.00, which can be waived.

Related official procedures

Free data copy (Datenkopie)
The check cannot be done without it
€0.00
Correcting an entry
If it is wrong rather than unlawful
Free of charge
Objection and complaint
If the deletion is refused
Free of charge

Cannot find the official procedure you are looking for?

Tell us what information you need.

Send a request