BFSG warning letter from Germany: what to do now

A letter from a German law firm, the accusation: your website violates the Barrierefreiheitsstärkungsgesetz (BFSG), Germany's accessibility law. Attached: a payment demand, a pre-formulated cease-and-desist declaration and a deadline that is already running. In Germany this instrument is called an Abmahnung, a formal warning letter through which one market participant demands that another stop a legal violation, usually combined with a claim for costs. If your company sells to German consumers and this mail just arrived, this guide helps you sort the next steps, as of July 2026. One thing first, because it matters more than everything that follows: this article is no substitute for legal advice. A real Abmahnung with a running deadline belongs in the hands of a lawyer, ideally one qualified in German competition law.

What is happening: two waves of warning letters since 2025

Since 28 June 2025 the BFSG applies to many websites, shops and apps aimed at consumers in Germany, including companies selling into the country from abroad. What the law demands and who is covered is explained in our guide to Germany's BFSG. Barely was the deadline past when the commercial exploitation began: Abmahnungen based on sections 3 and 3a of the German Unfair Competition Act (UWG). The logic behind them: whoever skips accessibility gains an unfair advantage over competitors who invested in it.

The first wave has been rolling since August 2025. A Cologne law firm sends letters on behalf of a web designer. The demands sit around 595 euros, combined with a typical payment deadline of 10 days and a period of 3 months to make the website accessible. Trusted Shops has documented this wave in detail.

Since February 2026 a second wave has been running, and it is set up more professionally. A Berlin law firm demands around 2,700 euros, in one documented real case exactly 2,706.18 euros, and claims a value in dispute of 50,000 euros. The important difference to the first wave: these letters come with WCAG audit reports by an external testing provider attached. Whoever counts on the letter naming no concrete violations and collapsing on its own will be disappointed here. The reports list findings, and findings can be checked. That is exactly what you should do.

Are these warning letters even lawful?

The honest answer: that is open. Whether BFSG violations can be pursued through the UWG at all has not been decided by any court. As of July 2026 there is no known ruling on this question. Both waves move on legally untested ground, and that cuts in both directions.

Many German legal experts consider the current letters contestable. Two arguments come up again and again: first, it is doubtful whether a concrete competitive relationship, which the UWG requires, exists between a web designer and, say, a furniture retailer who received the letter. Second, there are indications of abuse of rights, such as the mass mailing of practically identical letters. Whether these arguments hold up in court is exactly the part that has not been decided yet.

None of that means you may ignore the letter. First, the other side can take the claim to a German court, and then a judge decides instead of a blog post. Second, the alleged violations are often real: missing alt texts, weak contrast or unlabelled form fields sit on a great many websites and can be proven with any testing tool. An Abmahnung can be questionable in its craft and still not made up in its substance. Keeping those two levels apart is the core of a smart response.

The six steps after receiving one

These steps do not replace a lawyer. They make sure you enter the consultation prepared, miss no deadline and hand the other side no avoidable openings. One note for companies outside Germany: do not assume the letter is irrelevant because your registered office is abroad. If you direct your offer at German consumers, German law can apply to that business, so treat the deadlines as real.

1. Stay calm and record the deadlines. An Abmahnung is a letter from a law firm, not a court order. Put every deadline from the letter into your calendar with a buffer. In the first wave, 10 days to pay is typical: tight, but enough for an orderly response.
2. Sign nothing, pay nothing, not yet. Transferring the sum unchecked or signing the enclosed cease-and-desist declaration unchecked are the two most expensive reflexes. Both are almost impossible to correct later.
3. Check whether your offer is covered at all. The BFSG does not apply to every website. Pure information sites without shop or booking usually fall outside it, and microenterprises are exempt for services. The criteria and their grey areas are explained in our guide to Germany's BFSG.
4. Check whether the alleged violations exist. Scan your website against WCAG 2.2, with the check above that takes minutes. Compare the result with the audit report from the other side: what is proven, what is not, what has been fixed in the meantime?
5. Get legal advice. With a deadline list, a coverage assessment and a scan result, the mandate is well prepared. A lawyer for German competition law examines the competitive relationship, signs of abuse of rights and drafts, where sensible, a modified cease-and-desist declaration.
6. Fix the barriers, whatever the outcome. Even if this particular letter is contestable: the violations remain open flanks, for the next sender and for the authority. Whoever remediates now turns the Abmahnung into the last letter of its kind.

What you should not do

Most expensive mistakes happen in the first days, out of fear or out of defiance. These five reactions come up again and again, and they weaken your position:

• Letting the deadline pass because the letter is surely abusive anyway. Maybe it is. That has not been decided, and whoever does not react risks escalation to a German court.
• Paying unchecked to get some peace. The payment creates no legal certainty: without a reviewed declaration and without fixed barriers, the accusation stays alive.
• Signing the original declaration without having it reviewed. It binds for life and triggers a contractual penalty at every future violation.
• Negotiating with the law firm yourself before you are advised. Any spontaneous statement can be used against you later. Communication with the other side belongs in your lawyer's hands.
• Rebuilding the website in a panic without documenting. Fixing is right, but preserve the state at the time of the letter, for example with screenshots and a saved scan report. Your lawyer needs that evidence.

In parallel: the German authority checks independently

Warning letters are the civil-law risk. Next to it stands a second one, and it does not disappear when the Abmahnung is fought off: the market surveillance authority MLBF has been actively checking since January 2026 whether covered offers meet the requirements, partly with automated scans. At the end of the official escalation chain stand fines of up to 100,000 euros under Section 37 BFSG. How the authority proceeds and what a letter from Magdeburg means is covered in our guide to the MLBF market surveillance.

For your decision this means: even if your lawyer successfully fends off the letter, the barriers remain an open risk. Remediation is not a capitulation to the sender, it is the only path that closes both risks at once. And it helps the visitors the law is actually about.

Prevention: close the gaps that invite attack

Both waves and the authority's scans have one thing in common: they find the machine-detectable violations first. Missing alternative texts, insufficient contrast, unlabelled form fields, missing language markup: these are the points that show up in audit reports, because every tool finds them. The good news: they are also the fastest to fix. To be honest, an automated scan does not find everything, keyboard operation and a sensible reading order still need manual review. For the question of what a sender can prove against you, the scan is still the right starting point.

• All images have alternative texts, decorative ones are marked as such
• Text contrast meets the WCAG minimum values
• Every form field has a programmatically associated label
• The entire site can be operated by keyboard
• An accessibility statement is published and current
• A regular scan watches that updates introduce no new barriers

On the statement: which details Section 14 BFSG demands from private providers is covered in our guide to the accessibility statement requirements. You can create one with our generator, including a real website audit. A missing or obviously wrong statement is one of the easiest points of attack, for letter senders just as for the authority.

Frequently asked questions about BFSG warning letters

A warning letter is a bad day, not a verdict. Sort the deadlines, get legal help and get yourself facts: the scan above shows you in two minutes what the accusations are worth. After that you no longer negotiate in fog, you negotiate with findings.