Digitising the handover: what managers actually gain (2026)
Digitising the handover: what managers actually gain
Not for the paper, for three effects: a uniform procedure, a handover-ready file per unit, and an evidential value a phone photo does not have.
The date on an image file can be changed and does not evidence when it was taken, whereas a qualified eIDAS timestamp carries the presumption under Art. 41(2) of accurate date and time and of integrity.
Art. 41(2) eIDAS RegulationIn 60 seconds
Standardisation means the same procedure in every unit, whoever runs the appointment.
An ordinary phone photo evidences the condition, not the time. The date on the file can be changed.
A qualified eIDAS timestamp carries the presumption under Art. 41(2) that its date and time are accurate and the linked data intact; any later change makes verification fail.
A timestamp is no substitute for completeness either: perfectly sealed photos of three rooms prove nothing about the fourth.
The file must remain findable and handover-ready per unit: under § 667 BGB it belongs to the owner.
What the law says
A qualified electronic time stamp enjoys the presumption of the accuracy of the date and time it indicates and of the integrity of the data linked to them. What is stamped is the hash of the image, so any later change makes verification visibly fail. Working translation.
Photo, paper, sealed report
| Paper record | Phone photos | Sealed report | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Condition evidenced | partly (text) | yes | yes |
| Time evidenced | only by signature | no (date changeable) | yes (Art. 41(2) eIDAS) |
| Integrity checkable | no | no | yes: any change makes verification fail |
| Completeness | depends on the person | depends on the person | guided |
| Findable per unit | filing | often a device or inbox | a file per unit |
Data protection: documenting the flat is necessary for performing the tenancy. Photographing identifiable people is a different matter and needs its own basis; personal belongings only so far as unavoidable. Store where the processing is actually controlled and contractually secured, and keep it no longer than the purpose requires.
Related: The duty to document towards owners.
What it means for each side
- Ask for an identical copy of the report the same day.
- A report you already hold is rarely disputed later.
- Check that every room is captured, not only the contested ones.
- People may not be photographed without a separate basis.
- Choose guided capture that enforces completeness, not merely a digital form.
- Look for a qualified timestamp per photo, not a date in the filename.
- Test whether a report can be verified without the app.
- Give both sides an identical copy the same day.
Common mistakes
The benefit is in the procedure, the evidential value and handover-readiness, not the paper.
It is changeable and does not evidence when the picture was taken.
Full coverage remains a separate requirement.
Documenting the flat is necessary; identifiable people need a separate basis, and personal belongings only so far as unavoidable.
What to do next
Introduce a guided procedure that enforces completeness. Do it with BildProof, about two minutes a room →
Ensure a qualified timestamp on every photo.
Test the report's independent verifiability, without the app.
Align storage location and retention with the deadlines and with who actually controls the processing.
Frequently asked questions
What does digitising the handover actually deliver?
Three things: standardisation, because a guided procedure is walked through with the same thoroughness in every unit; findability, because the file stays complete per unit instead of sitting on devices and in inboxes; and evidential weight, where the photos carry a qualified timestamp. Time saved at the appointment itself is more of a side effect. The real gain is in the cases that never become contested.
Why are phone photos not enough?
Because they establish the condition but not the timing. Procedurally a photo is an Augenscheinsobjekt (object of visual inspection, § 371 ZPO) under free evaluation of evidence (§ 286 ZPO), and the date attached to an image file can be changed with freely available software, so it is not treated as proof. If the tenant disputes the date, the burden stays with the landlord side.
What is a qualified eIDAS timestamp?
A timestamp from a qualified trust service provider under Regulation (EU) No 910/2014. Under Art. 41(2) eIDAS it carries a presumption that its date and time are accurate and that the linked data is intact. What is stamped is not the image itself but its checksum: any later change to the image makes verification fail, and thus visible.
Are photos allowed at the handover at all?
Documenting the flat is necessary for performing the tenancy and is therefore normally allowed. It is different for images in which people are identifiable, or photos going beyond the contractual purpose: those need their own legal basis. In practice: photograph rooms and condition, not people, and personal belongings only where unavoidable.
Where may handover photos be stored?
Where the manager actually controls the processing and has it contractually covered. Photos of managed properties in personal cloud accounts or on employees' private devices are problematic for two reasons: under data protection law, because the processing is not governed; and practically, because the records must remain surrenderable under § 667 BGB.
How long may the data be kept?
As long as the purpose requires. The principle of storage limitation calls for deletion afterwards. The deadlines over which claims can still arise set the yardstick: six months from return (§ 548(1) BGB), the twelve-month objection period for operating costs (§ 556(3) sentence 4 BGB), and the standard three-year limitation (§ 195 BGB). Tax and commercial retention duties may apply alongside.
This page gives general information as at the date shown. It does not replace legal advice on an individual case.