German court finds MediaMarkt’s manufacturer referral misleading in a defect complaint

A German court found a MediaMarkt online-store message directing a defect complainant straight to the manufacturer misleading.

The 24 July ruling was publicized on 8 October, is not yet final according to current reporting, and does not guarantee immediate refunds for every fault.

A refrigerator alarm led to the dispute

According to consumer organization vzbv, a customer reported a fridge-freezer whose door alarm kept sounding with the door closed, just over a year after purchase. Customer service pointed to a manufacturer’s on-site repair service and told the buyer to take guarantee or statutory defect claims directly to the manufacturer. The defendant was online-store operator MMS E-Commerce GmbH. The dispute concerned the impression created by that email, beyond the appliance fault itself.

Explaining repair arrangements is different from disclaiming responsibility

The Ingolstadt Regional Court case is 1 HK O 1352/25. It found the disputed email conveyed that the seller was not the responsible party for statutory defect claims. The customer’s persistence despite that message did not change the assessment. This is not a ban on every reference to manufacturer repair services; the issue is communication, as in the disputed emails, that conveys the seller has no responsibility.

Keep a manufacturer’s guarantee separate from seller liability

A manufacturer’s promised guarantee and statutory defect rights against the contractual seller are distinct. Combining them in one instruction can confuse the customer about whom to contact and on what basis. The case illustrates that communication boundary, rather than deciding identical repair, replacement or refund outcomes for every product. Purchase timing, the fault and contractual circumstances still matter, and this German case should not be applied wholesale to transactions in Korea.

Distinguish the judgment date, publication and finality

The judgment dates to 24 July 2026, vzbv’s explanation to 8 October and etailment’s report to 9 October. It is not a new law taking effect today. Independent reporting describes the decision as not yet final; any appeal or later finality needs further checking. The linked judgment’s operative order and reasoning were compared with the claimant organization’s account and independent reporting. Keeping the receipt, fault description and service replies helps establish which responsibility a customer invoked.

Primary source and independent checks

Primary source and official explanation: LG Ingolstadt

Primary source and official explanation: vzbv

Independent reporting check: etailment

Read in other languages

한국어 · English · Español · 日本語 · Tiếng Việt