Situation: €410,000 outstanding. A Danish SaaS company had provided enterprise software licensing and implementation services to a Berlin-based technology company. The implementation was completed, the software was in production use, and the Berlin company's own employees had confirmed in writing that the deliverables met specifications. Four invoices totalling €410,000 remained unpaid after 145 days.
The Berlin debtor was a well-funded Series B startup with approximately €8 million in annual revenue, 95 employees, and offices in Berlin-Mitte. They were not cash-constrained. They were engaging in a practice common among Berlin's tech ecosystem: treating vendor invoices as an interest-free credit line, paying only when enforcement pressure made further delay irrational.
What we deployed
The Mahnverfahren. Germany's automated payment order procedure is Europe's most efficient creditor instrument. The creditor files a Mahnantrag (payment order application) at the central Mahngericht (payment order court). The court issues a Mahnbescheid (payment order) without reviewing the merits of the claim. The debtor has 14 days to file a Widerspruch (objection) or the creditor can apply for a Vollstreckungsbescheid (enforcement order), which has the same effect as a court judgment.
We filed the Mahnantrag at the Amtsgericht Wedding (Berlin's designated Mahngericht). The Mahnbescheid was issued within 10 days.
The debtor's counter-move. As anticipated, the Berlin company filed a Widerspruch on day 12 — well within the 14-day window. The Widerspruch is the standard delay tactic for German debtors: it requires no substantive grounds, costs nothing, and converts the fast-track Mahnverfahren into an Urteilsverfahren (ordinary court proceedings) at the competent Landgericht (regional court).
The Urteilsverfahren with Urkundenprozess. Rather than proceeding through standard civil litigation (which in Berlin can take 6-12 months to reach a hearing), we filed under the Urkundenprozess (documentary procedure) under §§ 592-605a of the German Code of Civil Procedure (ZPO). The Urkundenprozess is an accelerated procedure available when the claim is supported entirely by documentary evidence. The court examines only the documents — no witness testimony, no expert opinions, no lengthy discovery. The procedure typically produces a judgment within 2-4 months.
We presented the signed contract, the implementation acceptance certificate, the four invoices, and the email correspondence confirming that the software was in production use. The Berlin company's Widerspruch alleged vague "performance issues" but could produce no documentary evidence supporting the allegation.
The Landgericht Berlin issued a Vorbehaltsurteil (provisional judgment) under § 599 ZPO within 6 weeks of filing. The Vorbehaltsurteil is immediately enforceable — the debtor can file a Nachverfahren (subsequent proceeding) to challenge the judgment, but enforcement proceeds in the interim.
The Kontopfändung. With the enforceable Vorbehaltsurteil, we instructed the Gerichtsvollzieher (court bailiff) to execute a Kontopfändung (bank account seizure) under § 829 ZPO. German bank account seizures are served directly on the debtor's bank, which is legally required to freeze funds up to the judgment amount immediately upon receipt of the seizure order.
We identified the debtor's primary banking relationship through Handelsregister (commercial register) filings and payment transaction analysis. The seizure captured €287,000 from the debtor's operating account within 48 hours of service.
The resolution
The debtor's CEO contacted our Frankfurt office directly within three days of the Kontopfändung. The frozen operating account was disrupting payroll processing and supplier payments. Settlement was reached within one week: €410,000 paid in full plus statutory interest under § 288 BGB (German Civil Code) at 9 percentage points above the ECB base rate for commercial claims. The Nachverfahren was not pursued. Timeline: 63 days from mandate to full payment.
The Berlin intelligence note
Berlin's tech ecosystem has a documented pattern of vendor payment delay. The combination of well-funded companies and a culture of cash conservation creates an environment where sophisticated debtors use procedural mechanisms to extend payment timelines. The Widerspruch in the Mahnverfahren is the standard first move. The counter is the Urkundenprozess, which neutralises the delay by producing an enforceable judgment on an accelerated timeline.
If you're owed money by a German entity and the debtor has filed a Widerspruch or is using delay tactics, the German enforcement toolkit has specific instruments for each scenario. Brief our Frankfurt team for a German enforcement assessment.
