House purchase through agent, now contract terminated

Hello.

We were interested in an old building, a viewing took place. The sale would be through an agent, the agency contract was with the seller.

So far, the purchase has not been completed. Now the seller has terminated the agent.

What happens now if I buy the house privately in the next few weeks? Does the agent have a claim to the commission from my side, the buyer? Or can he still demand a fee from the seller since the contract was with him?

Thank you for your help

We were interested in an old building, a viewing took place. Sale would be through an agent, agent contract through the seller.

You were offered the house through an agent? I don't understand the text. What was agreed regarding the payment of his commission – between you and the agent or between the seller and the agent?

So far the purchase has not been completed. Now the seller has terminated the agent.

That is initially irrelevant for a commission, because normally the agent is a mediator and thus he would have done his job for both the seller and the buyer.

What happens now if I buy the house privately in the next few weeks?

There is no such thing as buying privately. Buying always takes place at the notary. The agent introduced you to the property, that counts as the proof.

Does the agent have a claim to the commission from my side, the buyer?

Of course. He has done his job and named you the property you are now buying. Unless the agent explicitly did not insist on a commission in his proof towards you. Please answer the first question for that.

Or can he still demand a fee from the seller, since the contract was with him?

Definitely there.

Thank you for your contribution. We were not offered the house through a real estate agent. It was advertised, and we then simply asked him for a viewing appointment because we found the property interesting.

We have not agreed anything in writing with the agent regarding commission payment; the 3.57% is known. The seller had a contract with him.

I do not plan to buy the property yet, but if no other buyer is found, and we come to an agreement after terminating the contract, say in the summer, are the commissions still valid? If that were the case, then the seller would not have had to terminate at all if both parties still have to pay commission anyway. Unless another buyer is found. Or am I misunderstanding something? I hope I have answered everything.

Thank you for your contribution. We did not receive the house through an agent. It was listed and we then simply asked him for a viewing appointment because we found the property interesting.

Well, that basically counts as what is meant by "offered through an agent."

We have not agreed anything in writing with the agent regarding commission payment; the 3.57% is known.

That is more relevant, but also very odd. Since around 2020, in my experience, you no longer get a viewing if you have not previously (or at least at the beginning of the viewing) agreed in text form (i.e., on paper or electronically, e.g., by email or confirmation by click in a portal of the agent) to the commission obligation. Simply making contact via Immoscout is not a conclusion of an agent contract. An exception to this practice are the very rare "qualified exclusive mandates" from agents, where the owner is not allowed to sell the property themselves. In this case, agents mostly waive a commission agreement at the viewing because for the interested party there is no way around the agent later on.

I do not intend to buy the property yet, but if no other buyer is found and we now come to an agreement after terminating the contract, say in summer, are the commissions still valid?

You are operating in a gray area here. If an agent contract expires, the commission obligation generally still applies after the contract ends. In practice, this is arranged so that the owner receives a list of names after the agent contract ends, for which a commission obligation exists if the property is sold to them. Honestly, I (as an interested party) have never encountered a situation where the agent did not secure himself with the interested party. I am not a lawyer, but I could imagine that if you buy the property, only the seller has to pay a commission. Whether 3.57% or 7.14% depends on his contract.

If that were the case, then the seller would not have had to cancel, since both parties would have to pay commission anyway.

That is true to some extent, but it is easier for the seller to attract interested parties (e.g., advertise himself) if he currently has no agent contract. If he still has the agent contract and actively looks for interested parties himself or even advertises, then the agent can feel sidelined and reduce his efforts. Tip: If you believe you don’t need the services of an agent, then it is best not to contact him at all. That way you take no risk. Instead, contact the owner directly.

Thank you for your contribution. We were not offered the house through a real estate agent. It was advertised, and we then simply asked him for a viewing appointment because we found the property interesting.

Yep, that is the agent's task.

We have not agreed in writing anything with the agent regarding the commission payment; 3.57% is known.

Which 3.57% is known? How did the agent react to your viewing appointment? Any reasonable agent would have this confirmed in writing – and that would also include something about the commission.

I do not intend to buy the property yet, but if no other buyer is found, and after terminating the contract we come to an agreement say in summer, are the commissions still valid then?

The commissions in the plural? At least towards the seller, definitely. It rather takes about a year after termination before the agent can no longer claim a commission.

If that were the case, then the seller would not have had to terminate at all if both parties still have to pay commission anyway. Unless another buyer is found. Or am I misunderstanding something?.. I hope I have answered everything

Maybe the agent just did not perform? Should have achieved a higher purchase price or done whatever else. Reasons for termination can be varied. has already written enough about this.

We have not signed anything. I know, for example, from banks that offer real estate, that before they send the exposé, they send a cancellation policy which I had to sign. But that was not the case here. The exposé was sent to us upon request, in which only the obligatory information was in the fine print. All in all, I understand it now as meaning that it doesn’t financially benefit me to save money because the seller no longer has an agent? Because in any case I have to pay a fee to an agent since I had contact with the agent for the property? So I am basically out of the running for interest in the property. Unfortunately