Purpose
The skill answers the preliminary question on which most travel mandates are decided before any dispute over defects begins: Who is liable for what? It classifies the distribution as a package, intermediation or linked travel arrangement, reviews the pre-contractual information duties together with the form, and corrects the most common advisory error in this area — the assumption that a trip booked online can be revoked.
Inputs
- Booking channel (travel agency, operator's website, online portal, comparison portal, telephone)
- Appearance of the distribution partner: promise of own services, presentation of prices, T&Cs, legal notice
- Number and type of booked travel services and their temporal linkage
- Pre-contractual information and form received
- Booking confirmation, issuer of the invoice, recipient of payment
- Specific booking error with date and effect
- Any cancellation instruction and declared cancellation
- Voucher solution offered or accepted
Sub-agent architecture
A researcher determines the actual appearance of the distribution partner, obtains the booking process, T&Cs and form, and assigns the relevant provisions. A drafter applies §§ 651a, 651v and 651w BGB, reviews the information duties under Art. 250 EGBGB and the consequences of their breach, and drafts the claim letter. A reviewer checks the assignment of roles, the exclusion of the right of cancellation and every citation; anything unconfirmed is marked with [unverifiziert - prüfen] .
Process
1. Delineation of roles (§ 651a BGB, § 651v BGB, § 651w BGB)
| Role | Characteristic | Liability |
|---|---|---|
| Tour operator § 651a | procures a combination of at least two different types of travel services for the same trip; appears as the provider of the combination | full liability for all travel services under §§ 651i et seq. BGB |
| Travel intermediary § 651v | intermediates a package travel contract with a third party; does not itself become a party to the travel contract | liability only for its own fault (advice, booking, information) |
| Linked travel arrangements § 651w | intermediation of several individual contracts in a specific temporal and organisational linkage, without being a package | no travel contract law; only insolvency protection and information |
What is decisive is not the self-designation, but the appearance vis-à-vis the traveller (Section 651a(2) BGB): Anyone who creates the appearance of providing the travel services under their own responsibility is a tour operator — even if the T&Cs describe them as an "intermediary". Under Section 651b BGB, moreover, anyone who arranges travel services in such a way that the traveller gains the impression of a package holiday is also treated as a tour operator.
Practical rule: Where the price is presented as a total price, with a uniform invoice and a uniform booking confirmation, much points to tour operator status.
2. Linked travel arrangements in detail (Section 651w BGB)
Linked travel arrangements presuppose that the trader arranges separate contracts for the traveller for at least two different types of travel services and in doing so either procures separate selection and payment during a single visit or contact or, in a targeted manner, procures the booking of a further service from another trader within 24 hours of the first booking confirmation.
Legal consequence: no claim under Sections 651i et seq. BGB. The traveller is referred to the individual contracts. However, the trader owes the information under Article 251 EGBGB and the insolvency protection under Section 651w(3) BGB. If they fail to provide the prescribed information, they are liable under Section 651w(4) BGB as a tour operator — the harshest sanction of distribution law and the most effective point of attack for online portals.
3. Pre-contractual information duties and the form (Article 250 Section 1 EGBGB, Article 250 Section 3 EGBGB)
Before the traveller gives their declaration of intent to conclude the contract, the legally prescribed form must be provided to them, informing them of the classification as a package holiday and of their essential rights (Article 250 Section 2 EGBGB). In addition, information must be provided on the points listed in Article 250 Section 3 EGBGB — among others, the travel services and their features, the total price including taxes and ancillary costs, payment modalities, the minimum number of participants, passport and visa requirements, the right of withdrawal and insolvency protection.
Legal consequences of information defects:
- Under Section 651d BGB , the information becomes part of the contract; it is the benchmark for the owed condition under Section 651i(2) BGB.
- If information is missing about additional fees, charges and other costs, the traveller does not owe them.
- Breaches of information duties can give rise to damages under Section 280(1) BGB in conjunction with Section 241(2) BGB and, in the case of fault in the conclusion of the contract, Section 311(2) BGB.
- Under Article 250 Section 6 EGBGB, the content of the contract must be provided on a durable medium upon or immediately after conclusion of the contract.
The information duties apply to the tour operator and the intermediary jointly; the intermediary cannot take refuge in the claim that the information came from the tour operator.
4. Liability of the intermediary for booking errors (Section 651v BGB)
The travel agent is not liable for the travel services, but is liable for its own breaches of duty under the agency contract with the traveler:
- Booking errors — wrong date, wrong airport, wrong spelling of name, add-on service not booked. Section 651x of the German Civil Code (BGB) makes clear that liability exists for technical booking errors insofar as they are attributable to the operator.
- Advice errors — failure to point out passport and visa requirements, vaccination requirements, connection times, travel warnings, the need for travel cancellation insurance.
- Failure to forward declarations: Under Section 651v(4) of the German Civil Code (BGB), a declaration by the traveler made to the agent is also deemed to have been made to the tour operator — notice of defects and withdrawal vis-à-vis the travel agency therefore have effect.
- Acceptance of payment without a security certificate (Section 651t of the German Civil Code (BGB)) — the agent may accept payments only under the same conditions as the tour operator.
The agent is furthermore liable under Section 651v(2) of the German Civil Code (BGB) for information obligations insofar as they apply to it.
5. Online booking and the exclusion of the right of withdrawal (Section 312g(2) No. 9 of the German Civil Code (BGB))
This is the most common advice error in travel law. A distance contract generally exists for online or telephone bookings. However, a right of withdrawal does notexist: Section 312g(2) No. 9 of the German Civil Code (BGB) exempts from the right of withdrawal contracts for the provision of services in the areas of accommodation for purposes other than residential purposes, transport of goods, motor vehicle rental, delivery of food and beverages, and the provision of other services in connection with leisure activities if the contract provides for a specific date or period for the provision.
Practical consequences:
- For flights, hotels and package tours with a fixed date, there is no withdrawal. Cancellation is possible exclusively via withdrawal under Section 651h of the German Civil Code (BGB) against compensation or, under the conditions set out there, without compensation (
/reise-fluggastrecht:reiseruecktritt-insolvenzschutz). - For outside business premises concluded package travel contracts, Section 651i of the German Civil Code (BGB) and the regulatory context of Sections 651a et seq. of the German Civil Code (BGB) provide for special cases; the scope of a right of withdrawal in this constellation must be examined separately
[unverifiziert - prüfen]. - A withdrawal instruction provided voluntarily by the operator can establish a contractual right of termination — this is a question of interpretation and must be examined on a case-by-case basis.
- A "free cancellation until …" in the terms and conditions is a contractual right of withdrawal, not a revocation; its wording is decisive.
6. Voucher solutions
If the contract is unwound, the operator owes refund in money. A voucher is a performance in lieu of fulfilment and requires the consent of the traveller; it cannot be imposed unilaterally. Before acceptance, the voucher's insolvency protection, redemption period, transferability and the question of whether further claims are to be settled by acceptance must be examined. The Union law line on reimbursement in the package travel sector follows from CJEU, judgment of 08.06.2023 – C-407/21, EuZW 2023, 709 (dejure.org), scope to be examined in the individual case [unverifiziert - prüfen].
7. Evidence and documentation
Role allocation is decided on the basis of documents, not assertions. The following must be secured: the complete booking process with screenshots, the T&Cs in the version of the booking date, the imprint, the form, the booking confirmation, the invoice, the payee and the entire correspondence. For online portals, the booking process must be archived promptly because it is continually changed.
Sources
Statute
- § 651a BGB, § 651b BGB, § 651c BGB, § 651d BGB, § 651i BGB, § 651t BGB, § 651v BGB, § 651w BGB, § 651x BGB, § 651y BGB
- § 312g BGB, § 312c BGB, § 355 BGB
- § 241 BGB, § 280 BGB, § 311 BGB
- Art. 250 § 1 EGBGB, Art. 250 § 2 EGBGB, Art. 250 § 3 EGBGB, Art. 250 § 6 EGBGB
- Directive (EU) 2015/2302, Art. 5, 6, 19
Commentaries
- Tonner, in: MüKo-BGB, § 651a marginal no. 1 et seq., § 651v marginal no. 1 et seq., § 651w marginal no. 1 et seq.
- Führich, Reiserecht, chapter on travel intermediation and information obligations.
- Steinrötter, in: BeckOGK BGB, § 651w marginal no. 1 et seq.
- Geib, in: BeckOK BGB, § 651v marginal no. 1 et seq.
Case law
- CJEU, judgment of 08.06.2023 – Case C-407/21, UFC-Que choisir and CLCV, EuZW 2023, 709 = MDR 2023, 964 (reimbursement in package travel law after cancellation; Directive (EU) 2015/2302), dejure.org
- CJEU, judgment of 12.03.2002 – Case C-168/00, Leitner, NJW 2002, 1255 = EuZW 2002, 339 (non-material damage; on the protective purpose of package travel law), dejure.org
- For the distinction between organizer / intermediary based on the appearance vis-à-vis the traveller, the case law of the lower courts must be researched on a case-by-case basis
[unverifiziert - prüfen]
Output format
REISEVERMITTLUNG / INFORMATIONSPFLICHTEN — <Mandat> — <Datum>
I. Buchungsvorgang
Buchungsweg: <Reisebüro / Website / Portal / Telefon>
Vertriebspartner: <…> Selbstbezeichnung: <…>
Leistungen: <Anzahl / Arten>
Rechnungssteller: <…> Zahlungsempfänger: <…>
II. Rollenzuordnung
Einordnung: [Veranstalter § 651a / Vermittler § 651v /
verbundene Reiseleistungen § 651w]
Maßgebliche Indizien: <Gesamtpreis / einheitliche Bestätigung / Auftreten>
Anspruchsgegner: <…>
III. Informationspflichten
Formblatt Art. 250 § 2: [übermittelt / FEHLT]
Angaben Art. 250 § 3: [vollständig / Lücken: <…>]
Dauerhafter Datenträger Art. 250 § 6: [ja / nein]
Folge der Verletzung: <Vertragsinhalt § 651d / Kostenfreiheit /
Haftung wie Veranstalter § 651w Abs. 4>
IV. Vermittlerhaftung § 651v
Buchungsfehler: <…>
Beratungsfehler: <…>
Erklärungszugang Abs. 4: <…>
Zahlungsannahme § 651t: [zulässig / unzulässig]
V. Widerrufsrecht
Fernabsatzvertrag: [ja / nein]
§ 312g Abs. 2 Nr. 9 BGB: [Widerrufsrecht ausgeschlossen / ausnahmsweise offen]
Vertragliches Lösungsrecht: <…>
Statthafter Ausstieg: Rücktritt § 651h BGB
VI. Gutschein
Angeboten: [ja / nein] Angenommen: [ja / nein]
Absicherung / Frist: <…>
VII. Risiko: 🟢 / 🟡 / 🔴 <Begründung>
VIII.Quellenverzeichnis
Drafting aid — claim letter to the intermediary (framework)
An <Reisebüro / Portal>
Ansprüche wegen fehlerhafter Vermittlung
Buchung <Nr.>, Reisezeitraum <von – bis>
Sehr geehrte Damen und Herren,
ich zeige die Vertretung von <Name> an.
1. Rolle
Sie sind ausweislich <Buchungsbestätigung / Rechnung / AGB>
als Reisevermittler iSd § 651v BGB tätig geworden.
Vorsorglich weise ich darauf hin, dass eine Einordnung als
Reiseveranstalter nach § 651a Abs. 2 BGB in Betracht kommt, weil
<Gesamtpreisdarstellung / einheitliche Bestätigung / Auftreten>.
2. Pflichtverletzung
Bei der Buchung am <Datum> haben Sie <Fehler>. Der Fehler ist
Ihnen zuzurechnen (§§ 651v, 651x BGB iVm §§ 280 Abs. 1,
241 Abs. 2 BGB).
3. Informationspflichten
Das Formblatt nach Art. 250 § 2 EGBGB wurde nicht übermittelt;
über <Punkt> nach Art. 250 § 3 EGBGB wurde nicht informiert.
Die hierdurch entstandenen Kosten in Höhe von <…> EUR schuldet
mein Mandant nicht.
4. Schaden
<Position 1>: <…> EUR
<Position 2>: <…> EUR
Gesamt: <…> EUR
Ich fordere Sie auf, den Betrag bis zum <Datum> zu erstatten.
Ein Widerruf nach §§ 312g, 355 BGB wird ausdrücklich nicht
erklärt, da das Widerrufsrecht nach § 312g Abs. 2 Nr. 9 BGB
ausgeschlossen ist; der Anspruch stützt sich allein auf die
vorstehenden Pflichtverletzungen.
Risks / typical mistakes
- Cancellation recommended. § 312g (2) no. 9 BGB largely excludes the right of cancellation for date-related travel services; the exit is via § 651h BGB. This is the most common advisory error in the field.
- Role determined by self-designation. Decisive is the appearance vis-à-vis the traveller (§ 651a (2) BGB), not the T&C clause "we only arrange".
- Linked travel services treated as a package holiday. Section 651w of the German Civil Code (BGB) does not grant any rights in respect of defects — but it does provide for liability as an organizer if the information was not given.
- Form not requested. Without the form and the booking process, the breach of the information obligation cannot be proven.
- Declaration addressed only to the organizer. Under Section 651v(4) of the German Civil Code (BGB), the declaration vis-à-vis the intermediary also has effect vis-à-vis the organizer — and conversely, receipt by the intermediary must be documented.
- Voucher accepted without reservation. What is owed is reimbursement in money; acceptance may cut off further claims.
- Booking process not archived. Online portals change it constantly; without screenshots from the day of booking, the role assignment can hardly be established.
- Case number invented — verify every decision or mark it as
[unverifiziert - prüfen].