- Free initial consultation
- Active nationwide
- Immediate refund claim after engagement
Cancel coaching contract -
We demand your money back.
Lawyer Carl Christian Müller
Cancel coaching contract -
Have you signed a coaching contract? Get out of the coaching trap.
You have signed a coaching contract - and now you realize that the content does not deliver what was promised?
Coaching programs promise personal development and professional success - but many contracts turn out to be expensive and lacking in content. If you have booked coaching that does not deliver on its promises, we will check whether you can revoke, terminate or contest the contract.
Our law firm can help you recover payments you have already made or stop any further payments. Learn about your rights here — including for contracts concluded via platforms such as Copecart or Digistore24.
How do I get rid of my coaching contract?
From a legal perspective, there are several ways to get out of a contract. In many cases, those affected can take one of the following approaches:
- Withdraw from the coaching contract – If the contract was concluded online, by phone, or at an event, you will likely have a statutory 14-day right of withdrawal.
- Terminate the coaching contract – You may have a contractual right to terminate the agreement.
- Rescind (challenge) the coaching contract – If you were induced to sign through misleading promises, aggressive sales tactics, or grossly inflated prices, it may be possible to challenge the contract on grounds such as misrepresentation/fraud or unconscionability.
- Contract may be invalid – If the provider lacks the required authorisation under Germany’s Distance Learning Protection Act (FernUSG), the contract may be invalid in certain cases.
Your contact person
Rechtsanwalt Carl Christian Müller, LL.M. Fachanwalt für Urheber- und Medienrecht
Enforcement in the termination of coaching contracts
- Years of experience in in unwinding and reclaiming payments under coaching contracts
- Solution-oriented and consistent - both out of court and in court
- Available for you nationwide
Booked an online coaching programme and now regret it?
Courts are increasingly finding high-priced coaching contracts to be invalid — often with the result that no further instalments are owed and payments already made may be recoverable. Recent landmark case law of the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH), in particular its judgments of 12 June 2025 (III ZR 109/24) and 2 October 2025 (III ZR 173/24), now expressly applies Germany’s Distance Learning Protection Act (FernUSG) to many typical online coaching programmes — in both B2C and B2B contexts.
We will review whether, under the latest case law, your coaching contract qualifies as distance learning and may therefore be void due to a lack of the required authorisation.
Why the legal position has changed
Recent case law of the German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) — including III ZR 109/24 (12 June 2025) and III ZR 173/24 (2 October 2025) — confirms that many online coaching programmes can qualify as distance learning under the FernUSG. The decisive factor is the programme’s structure (on-demand curriculum plus learning support/monitoring), not the label “coaching”.
Since III ZR 137/25 (5 February 2026), pure live online teaching with real-time interaction does not automatically fall under the FernUSG. Where ZFU authorisation is required but missing, the contract is often void, and repayment claims may be possible.
Protection also for freelancers and business owners
For a long time, many providers argued that Germany’s Distance Learning Protection Act (FernUSG) only protects consumers. Recent case law has clearly rejected this view. It is now established that freelancers and business owners who book, for example, a “business mentoring” programme or revenue coaching can also rely on the protection of the FernUSG — provided the contract has the typical features of distance learning.
For you, this means: Even if you booked the coaching “for your business”, overly one-sided clauses, attempted exclusions of withdrawal rights or instalment plans with high monthly payments are not necessarily the final word. We review whether your contract is invalid under the more recent case law and how you can be released from further payment obligations.
When your coaching contract may be challengeable
Courts are particularly critical of coaching models that:
- run for several months,
- can be used mainly on a time-shifted basis (e.g. learning platform, videos, modules, recordings),
- rely on pre-produced materials (videos, scripts, learning platforms), and
- include some form of learning support or monitoring of progress (e.g. feedback on assignments, Q&A formats, chat or email support).
If such a programme lacks the required ZFU authorisation, current case law — including BGH III ZR 109/24 and III ZR 173/24 — strongly suggests that the contract may be void. In these situations, there are often very good prospects of stopping further payments and recovering all or a substantial part of the amounts already paid.
FernUSG: Where the limits lie
Courts also draw clear boundaries. Pure one-to-one consulting, where a coach works with you in personal sessions without a pre-structured teaching programme, without video courses and without systematic knowledge transfer, will generally not fall under the FernUSG. The same applies to purely “passive” video courses where there is no possibility to ask questions or receive feedback. In such cases, classic withdrawal rules and standard terms (AGB) issues are more likely to be relevant.
What is new is the BGH clarification (5 February 2026 – III ZR 137/25): A programme that is essentially designed as live teaching with direct, real-time interaction (comparable to in-person instruction) is not automatically distance learning simply because it takes place online. What matters is the overall format as agreed in the contract.
Extremely expensive coaching programmes and unconscionability
In addition to the FernUSG, extremely overpriced coaching contracts may also be void for being contrary to public policy under section 138 of the German Civil Code (BGB). This can be relevant in particular where five-figure sums are charged for very general, interchangeable “off-the-shelf” content. The threshold is higher than under the FernUSG, but it may be met where excessive pricing coincides with aggressive sales tactics and the customer’s financial overburdening.
We assess whether, in your case, there are indications not only of a FernUSG issue but also of usury or an unconscionable exploitation.
Coaching Contract Free Check: It’s that simple
-
Fill out the contact form
Complete our contact form and send us your documents — with no obligation.
-
We review your case
We assess the facts and legal position and call you back as soon as possible — usually the same day.
-
Free initial consultation
We provide a free initial phone consultation on potential costs and the prospects of success.
-
We get started
Once you instruct us, we act immediately and enforce your claims.
Terminating a coaching contract: when and how?
If you want to terminate a coaching contract, the first step is to look at the contractual provisions governing termination. While coaching contracts are typically service agreements, and the law provides for termination rights in principle, many providers attempt to exclude termination in the contract itself or in their standard terms and conditions (AGB).
The good news: Not every exclusion of termination rights is enforceable. In particular, where termination is restricted through standard terms, clients often have legal arguments to challenge such clauses. In addition, the right to terminate a coaching contract for cause (extraordinary termination) cannot be excluded.
Withdrawing from a coaching contract: how it works
Withdrawal rights apply to consumers only — beware of “business customer” clauses
Many coaching contracts are concluded online, by phone or at events. For these distance-selling contracts, a statutory 14-day right of withdrawal generally applies — meaning you can withdraw from the coaching contract within this period without giving reasons, provided you are acting as a consumer.
But be careful: Many providers try to circumvent this — for example by getting you, during the checkout process, to confirm that you are acting “as a business customer” or “as an entrepreneur”. That is not decisive in law. Whether you qualify as a consumer does not depend on a checkbox, but on the actual circumstances — in particular whether you concluded the contract for private or business purposes.
By the way: Even if you book coaching for career orientation or to explore a business idea, you will usually not be treated as a business customer. The Higher Regional Court of Stuttgart (OLG Stuttgart) confirmed this (judgment of 4 February 2025, case no. 6 U 46/24). In such cases, the coaching contract can therefore also be withdrawn.
Withdrawal period: up to 1 year and 14 days
Consumers generally have a 14-day period to withdraw from a contract. However, this 14-day period only starts once you have been properly informed about your right of withdrawal by the coaching provider. If you were not correctly informed, the withdrawal period can be extended to 12 months and 14 days.
Withdrawing from a coaching contract: also for digital content
Many coaches provide online access, video materials or PDF courses — legally, these are treated as digital content. In principle, a right of withdrawal also applies here. That right can lapse once a consumer receives immediate access to the coaching content after the contract is concluded.
However, this only applies if the consumer actively agreed that the provider may start performing before the withdrawal period ends and confirmed that they are aware this can lead to the loss of the right of withdrawal. In practice, valid consent is often missing. Many providers pre-tick checkboxes, which is not permitted. Without active consent, your right of withdrawal can remain in place — even if you have already accessed the content.
In summary: How to withdraw from an online coaching contract
First, check whether you concluded the coaching contract as a consumer. If so, you generally have a statutory right of withdrawal. Next, review your contract documents to see whether you were properly informed about that right. If you were, you typically have 14 days to withdraw. If the withdrawal information was missing or defective, the period can be extended to 12 months and 14 days.
Finally, check whether you actively consented to the services starting before the end of the withdrawal period and confirmed that you understand you may lose your withdrawal right as a result.
Not sure whether a right of withdrawal applies in your case? We are happy to help and discuss your options for withdrawing from the coaching contract as part of our free initial consultation.
Coaching contract invalid under the FernUSG
Valid only if the provider is properly authorised
Coaching contracts that qualify as distance learning contracts must meet certain statutory requirements to be valid. If the provider of the coaching programme does not hold the required authorisation under Germany’s Distance Learning Protection Act (FernUSG), or fails to comply with key legal requirements, the contract may be invalid. The German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) reaffirmed this in its landmark judgments of 12 June 2025 (III ZR 109/24) and 2 October 2025 (III ZR 173/24).
What does the FernUSG regulate?
Germany’s Distance Learning Protection Act (FernUSG) is designed to protect participants in distance learning programmes, in particular against unclear contracts and insufficient information. Key provisions include:
- Right of withdrawal: A distance learning contract can generally be withdrawn from within 14 days without giving reasons.
- Information duties: Providers must inform participants in good time and comprehensively about the contract and the services offered.
- Authorisation requirement: Providers must hold the required ZFU authorisation in order to lawfully offer and deliver distance learning programmes.
When does a coaching contract qualify as a distance learning contract?
A coaching contract falls under the FernUSG if it qualifies as a distance learning contract. This is typically the case where:
- knowledge or skills are taught in a structured way,
- this takes place mainly time-shifted and at a distance (e.g. via on-demand videos, digital learning materials, modules or recordings), and
- learning progress is monitored or the learning process is supported, for example through feedback, assignments, Q&A formats or support.
According to current case law (BGH, judgment of 12 June 2025 – III ZR 109/24), a coaching programme consisting of recorded live sessions, homework and learning modules can fall under the FernUSG — even if it also includes individual sessions or group calls. What matters is the overall character of the programme, not the label used to describe it.
Does the FernUSG still apply if the programme includes live calls (Zoom/Teams)?
Often yes — but not automatically. Since the BGH judgment of 5 February 2026 (III ZR 137/25), the following applies: A programme that is essentially designed as pure live teaching in real time, with a direct opportunity to ask questions and interact, does not automatically fall under the Distance Learning Protection Act (FernUSG).
Distance learning is more likely where the contract primarily provides for a self-study / on-demand programme (e.g. videos, assignments or on-demand modules — which can also include recordings of calls that are made available afterwards) and where learning support or monitoring of learning progress is also agreed (e.g. feedback, Q&A, support). What matters is the overall format owed under the contract.
In that case, ZFU authorisation under section 12 FernUSG is required. If it is missing, the contract is typically void, and participants may be able to recover payments already made.
Does the FernUSG apply in B2B cases?
Yes. The FernUSG can also apply in a B2B context. For a long time, it was disputed whether the Act was intended to protect consumers only, or also business owners and freelancers who book coaching for professional training. The German Federal Court of Justice (BGH) provided final clarity in 2025. In its landmark judgments of 12 June 2025 (III ZR 109/24) and 2 October 2025 (III ZR 173/24), the BGH held that the authorisation requirement under the FernUSG applies regardless of whether the contract was concluded with a consumer (B2C) or with a business/freelancer (B2B).
Checklist for participants: Does my coaching contract require ZFU authorisation?
Have you booked an expensive coaching programme and are unsure whether the contract is legally valid? This checklist helps you assess whether your programme may fall under Germany’s Distance Learning Protection Act (FernUSG). The more questions you answer with “Yes”, the more likely it is that the contract may be void without ZFU authorisation.
1. Basic contract setup
Paid programme: Are you paying a fee or course price for the coaching? (Free consultations generally do not fall under the FernUSG.)
Programme format: Does the programme mainly consist of time-shifted, on-demand content (e.g. learning platform, videos, modules, recordings) rather than primarily live teaching in real time?
Important: Live calls alone are not automatically enough since the BGH judgment of 5 February 2026 (III ZR 137/25). What matters is the overall format set out in the contract (live teaching vs. on-demand/self-study programme).
Time-shifted access (asynchronous learning): Can you access or complete key content at your own pace (e.g. recorded calls, videos, self-study modules)?
2. Type of teaching
Structured curriculum: Does the coaching follow a structured learning plan or curriculum (e.g. sequential video lessons or fixed course modules)?
Learning materials: Do you receive teaching materials such as recorded videos, workbooks, guides or scripts?
Skills/knowledge transfer: Is the programme designed to teach you new knowledge or skills (e.g. building a business, mindset training, professional upskilling)?
3. Learning support / monitoring of progress (“the key factor”)
The FernUSG can already apply if your learning progress is supported or monitored in any way. A “Yes” to any of the following is often enough:
Ability to ask questions: Can you ask individual questions about the content (e.g. in Q&A calls, a Facebook group or via chat)?
Feedback & corrections: Do you receive feedback on your tasks, exercises or progress?
Ongoing support/community: Is there a community (e.g. Slack, Discord, WhatsApp) where you receive content-related support with implementation?
Quizzes/tests: Does the platform offer quizzes or tests to check your level of understanding?
Evaluation & your rights as a customer
Result |
Legal significance |
Predominantly "Yes" |
Your coaching contract will most likely be classified as a distance learning contract. |
The prerequisite |
The provider must have an official approval for this program from the ZFU (State Central Agency for Distance Learning). |
Your chance |
If the provider does not have a license, the contract is void in accordance with Section 7 FernUSG. This means that the contract never legally existed. |
The consequence |
Under certain circumstances, you can demand full repayment of all payments already made, even if you have already used some or all of the coaching. We support you with our experience and expertise - and with free initial consultation! |
Do several points apply?
You have a good chance of a refund!
Free initial consultation
Rescinding (challenging) a coaching contract
If you entered into the contract based on false promises, pressure or deception, rescission (challenging the contract) may be the right way to get out of an unwanted agreement. This is particularly common where providers promise unrealistic results, conceal key contract terms, or misrepresent what you will actually receive. In such cases, there may be fraudulent misrepresentation or misleading conduct — and the contract may be challenged and treated as invalid retroactively.
The same can apply where there is a gross imbalance between the course fees and the value of the services provided — often referred to as usury under German law. These are the most common scenarios in which rescission may be possible:
Misrepresentation (deception)
Misrepresentation exists where a party was induced to enter into a contract by false statements or by the concealment of material information, for example:
- advertising with fake positive reviews,
- claiming professional qualifications the coaches do not actually have,
- offering course content that is not capable of achieving the promised goals,
- promising personal 1:1 coaching but providing only access to video materials instead.
Usury / grossly excessive pricing (“Wucher”)
“Wucher” may be relevant where there is a striking imbalance between what you pay and what you receive. In the context of coaching contracts, this often means that the fees far exceed the actual value of the content or services. One common indicator: you pay an unusually high price, while the provider’s effort to deliver the programme is comparatively low.
Coaching contracts via Copecart, Digistore24 & similar platforms: when contracts may be invalid
Who is your contractual partner?
Copecart and Digistore24 are among the best-known platforms for purchasing digital products, especially coaching programmes, online courses and e-books. Many providers of high-priced coaching programmes use these platforms to distribute their offers. In this setup, Copecart and Digistore24 typically act as an intermediary and payment processor. This can mean that the coaching contract is not concluded directly with the coach, but with Copecart GmbH or Digistore24 GmbH.
This structure can be confusing for customers — particularly when it comes to withdrawal, cancellation or unwinding the contract. Even if the coach delivers the content, the platform may be the contractual partner. As a result, the practical question often arises: who is the correct point of contact for legal steps — the provider or the platform?
Confused about who your contractual partner is?
Our law firm is familiar with the typical contract structures used on platforms such as Copecart and Digistore24. We review your documents and advise you on whether and how you can exit the coaching contract, whether a withdrawal is possible, and which party can be held legally responsible.
Coaching contracts invalid due to missing FernUSG authorisation
If a coaching programme falls within the scope of Germany’s Distance Learning Protection Act (FernUSG), the provider generally needs official authorisation. A common question is who must hold this authorisation — the coach, or the platform.
The decisive point is who the contractual partner is. Where a coaching programme is purchased via platforms such as Copecart, Digistore24 and similar services, the contract may be concluded with the platform rather than directly with the coach. In that case, the authorisation requirement can become relevant for the platform. In our experience, the required authorisation is often missing in such setups.
Practical consequence: Where authorisation is required but missing, there are strong arguments that the contract is invalid under the FernUSG. This can support claims for repayment of fees already paid and may allow you to stop further payments.
Terminating a coaching contract: what happens to my Klarna or PayPal instalment plan?
In many cases, there is no need to panic. Where the coaching contract and the instalment financing are legally linked (i.e. treated as one economic arrangement), a contract that is void under the FernUSG can also affect the validity of the payment plan.
We support you in putting a legally sound payment stop in place vis-à-vis the payment provider (e.g. Klarna or PayPal) and in documenting the position properly — with the aim of avoiding unnecessary collection measures and keeping your SCHUFA record clear.
My coach is based in Dubai — do I still have rights?
Yes. A provider is not automatically exempt from German law simply because they are based abroad. If the offer is targeted at customers in Germany, the requirements of Germany’s Distance Learning Protection Act (FernUSG) must be observed. In many cases, the contract may be void despite a “Dubai clause” if the required ZFU authorisation is missing.
Since payments are often processed via European payment providers (such as Copecart, Digistore24 or PayPal), there are often very good prospects of stopping payments or recovering money already paid — without having to file a lawsuit in Dubai.
Trader coaching booked and now having doubts? We review withdrawal and repayment options.
Trader coachings, “trading academies” and stock-market mentoring programmes are often promoted on TikTok, Instagram and YouTube with promises of quick profits and a luxury lifestyle. In practice, this is frequently a costly online programme that falls well short of what was promised — for example because, in the end, it mainly consists of video material, group chats or vague trading tips without a coherent strategy, sometimes presented as “trading signals”. If you have signed up for such a trading coaching programme, it is worth having the contract, the description of services and the withdrawal information reviewed at an early stage. Depending on how the agreement is structured, options may include withdrawal, termination, rescission (challenge), or recovering payments already made.
I enforce your rights!
Lawyer Carl Christian Müller was admitted to the bar in 2002 and has been supporting consumers in enforcing their rights for many years. He has extensive practical experience in all aspects of the termination and reversal of coaching contracts - both in out-of-court negotiations and in the judicial enforcement of claims against providers.
