First Civil Lawsuits Following Sparkasse Heist in Gelsenkirchen Begin at Essen Regional Court

At the center of the first case is a customer demanding 391,000 euros from the bank. She alleges that cash in that amount as well as jewelry were stolen from her broken-into safe deposit box. Immediately afterwards, at 2:30 p.m., the court will hear the lawsuit of a customer seeking nearly 49,000 euros for stolen gold coins and family jewelry. According to the lawyer, the facility in question is the second-largest safe deposit box installation in Germany.

The plaintiffs accuse the bank of serious failures in its security precautions. An expert opinion commissioned by the plaintiffs' side concludes that the Sparkasse should have monitored the walls and ceilings and should have equipped the vault as well as the underground parking garage with video cameras. The fire door leading to the stairwell should also have been checked for tampering before the Christmas weekend.

Accusations Against the Sparkasse

Daniel Kuhlmann, an attorney from Datteln who, by his own account, represents 650 victims of the heist, says: "Jede Variante hätte zu einer Alarmmeldung führen müssen, wenn der Tresorraum ordnungsgemäß gesichert gewesen wäre." He adds that there were no regular patrols by a security service around the vault. The evidence submitted by his clients regarding the contents of the safe deposit boxes adds up to total damages of 51.5 million euros.

The Sparkasse firmly rejects the accusations and cites numerous security measures. A spokesperson stated: "Wir sind der festen Überzeugung, dass wir den Tresorraum nach anerkanntem Stand der Technik gesichert haben." There were no breaches of duty on the part of the Sparkasse. So far, the institution has been able to return around 100 items to their owners.

Personal Fate of One Plaintiff

One of the first two plaintiffs is 63-year-old Joachim Alfred Wagner. He describes his loss: "In meinem Schließfach war meine Altersvorsorge in Gold. Und der Nachlass meiner Mutter, das Familienerbe." Wagner reports an estimated loss of around 49,000 euros. Speaking about his feelings after the heist, he says: "Ich schwanke zwischen Trauer und Wut."

Legally, these are civil proceedings in which possible claims for damages will be examined. According to the court, Thursday's hearing is scheduled as a conciliation hearing to determine whether the parties can reach a settlement. Kuhlmann is also pursuing a class action lawsuit so that not every customer has to sue individually.

Procedure and Sources

The course of the heist has since been reconstructed: According to the investigators' findings, the perpetrators used vehicles to gain unnoticed access to an underground parking garage, opened a stairwell through a presumably tampered fire door, and reached an archive room from which they drilled into the vault. Despite the professional approach, a large portion of the valuables was left behind in the vault.

Sources for the reporting are the Essen Regional Court, a conversation with the press spokesperson of the Sparkasse Gelsenkirchen, a press release from attorney Daniel Kuhlmann, and a conversation with the plaintiff Joachim Alfred Wagner.

In total, more than 3,000 safe deposit box holders are affected by the heist. If the security situation is found to be inadequate, the proceedings could trigger a wave of further lawsuits. The Sparkasse, meanwhile, emphasizes that it secured the facility in accordance with the state of the art.

A verdict in the first two cases is not expected on Thursday. If no settlement is reached, the Essen Regional Court is expected to hear the disputes in further hearings.