Buying a second-hand car: Why the label ‘not accident-free’ is not sufficient

A car dealership sells a second-hand car that has previously been written off – and conceals the truth behind a blanket clause in the invoice. Anyone who fails to provide consumers with specific information about previous damage risks having the sales contract rescinded.

Facts and background 

In May 2025, a consumer purchased a second-hand vehicle from a commercial car dealer for EUR 24,950.00. The vehicle was explicitly advertised online by the selling dealer as ‘accident-free’. When asked, the dealer merely admitted to a “minor accident”. However, the invoice then contained the following note: “The vehicle is expressly sold as not having been repainted and also not as accident-free!!”

After the handover, it transpired that the vehicle had in fact suffered an economic total loss, with net repair costs of over EUR 43,000.00 and a replacement value of only EUR 28,300.00. The buyer subsequently declared her withdrawal from the contract of sale and demanded that the transaction be rescinded.

Decision of the Cologne Regional Court: Rescission of the contract of sale

The Regional Court upheld the claim in its entirety and ordered the seller to repay EUR 23,445.87 (the purchase price less compensation for use based on the kilometres driven), concurrently with the return of the vehicle.

The court based its decision on several key considerations:

• Material defect pursuant to Section 434 of the German Civil Code (BGB): Buyers of a second-hand car may, in principle, expect that the vehicle has not been involved in an accident resulting in more than mere minor damage. Minor damage must be interpreted narrowly in this context. This covers only very minor external paintwork damage, but not bodywork damage or significant consequences of an accident. An economic total loss undoubtedly constitutes a significant material defect, irrespective of whether the vehicle was subsequently repaired.
• Invalidity of the blanket clause (Section 476(1) of the German Civil Code (BGB)): In the sale of consumer goods, a deviation from the objective requirements for the item sold is only permissible if the consumer is specifically informed of the particular deviating characteristic prior to the conclusion of the contract and the deviation is expressly and separately agreed. The mere note on the invoice stating ‘not accident-free’ does not satisfy these strict requirements. The note specifies neither the nature nor the extent of the damage, is not highlighted and has not been separately confirmed by the consumer, i.e. signed separately. 
• Verbal downplaying does not provide protection: the reference to an allegedly ‘minor accident’ does not reveal the actual extent of the total loss and therefore cannot constitute effective disclosure.

Consequently, according to the Regional Court, there was no valid negative quality agreement. The buyer was therefore entitled to withdraw from the contract.

Conclusion and practical advice 

Not every pre-existing damage automatically leads to rescission of the contract. The decisive factors are whether the damage goes beyond minor damage and whether it was properly disclosed. The decision of the Cologne Regional Court underlines the high standards required of commercial vehicle sellers when disclosing pre-existing damage to consumers. Sellers should bear the following in mind: 

• Provide specific information: Pre-existing damage must be described in a comprehensible manner before the contract is concluded, including the nature, extent, affected parts of the vehicle and repair status.
• Agree separately: The deviation from the expected condition must be highlighted and confirmed separately by theconsumer. Hidden clauses in invoices or standard wording are not sufficient.
• Ensure documentation: Any known expert reports, damage reports or repair invoices should be made verifiably available to the buyer before the contract is concluded.

(seeRegional Court of Cologne, judgement of 26 May 2026, ref. 18 O 329/25)