Is the broker contract legal?

Hello,

Several plots of land were offered by a municipality. This was publicly announced in the official gazette as well as on signs at the entrance to the town. Nowhere was a real estate agent mentioned. Also, the contact on the offers led by phone to the mayor. Unfortunately, he was curt and said he would get back to us. A few days later, a real estate agent from a Volksbank contacted us who had been commissioned by the mayor. The agent could not answer any of our questions and referred us back to the mayor. We contacted the VG directly regarding the development plan, etc., and received all the information there because the mayor did not respond to emails and dismissed us by phone. We also inspected the plot alone without the mayor or agent. Everything else was handled through the VG, including our decision to purchase the plot. Afterwards, the agent contacted us again by email informing us that he had arranged a notary contract for our review.

Upon reviewing the contract, we noticed that the real estate agent’s service was listed in the contract.

This would not be a problem for me in itself, but the agent did absolutely nothing except order a notary contract. Is this legal? 3.5% for nothing? We also did not sign a real estate agent contract.

A contract does not require written form. However, I think if you try to push this through, it could negatively affect the sale. Who knows? In the end, the mayor’s brother works at the bank.

If nothing says "commission-free," it unfortunately often is not.

since the mayor did not respond to emails and brushed us off on the phone.

And in a local community so dismally service-oriented towards new citizens, do you want to become taxpayers?

Has the broker informed you about the cancellation in writing in accordance with the necessary form?

A broker can earn their commission in two ways. Both roughly described:

Proof: in principle, they don't have to do anything except provide you with the property address and/or contact details of the owner and thereby partly cause the conclusion of the contract.

Mediation: here they have to do more and participate in the negotiation. This is confirmed by the broker clause in the purchase contract.

What the broker definitely has to do is clearly explain to you that a commission is due and, if the first contact did not take place in person, inform you about the 14-day cancellation right.

If they have done one or both of these things (and you can prove it), you can relatively safely avoid paying the commission… However, you should expect that it will end up in court. The broker certainly has legal expenses insurance and will risk it.

Here is post #6 again, compliant with the rules and without links in the text (post #6 was reported for deletion)

...
If he did not do one or both of these things (and you can prove it), you can relatively safely avoid the commission... but you should be prepared that it will end up in court. The agent certainly has legal expenses insurance and will risk it.

I consider the likelihood that it would go to court very low. The statutory (!) obligation (!) to properly inform about the right of withdrawal is anchored in the Building Code. The obligation to inform has also been repeatedly decided by the highest courts. Even the smallest formal error in the instruction leads to its ineffectiveness.
In addition, the agent would have to prove that HE properly explained the possibility of withdrawal. So if the withdrawal was made within the deadline to the agent, everything is settled. Of course, this only applies if contact was made by phone, email, etc., i.e., the contract was not concluded on the agent’s premises. The contract can also be concluded implicitly, i.e., without a signature.

It says:

"The right of withdrawal gives the client the right to revoke the agency contract within 14 days. The period begins on the day the agency contract is signed, but not before receipt of the withdrawal instruction. To meet the withdrawal deadline, it is sufficient if the client sends the revocation before the withdrawal period expires. The receipt by the agent does not matter. The client does not need to provide reasons for the revocation. The client can declare the revocation in any form. However, since the client has the burden of proof in case of dispute, a written revocation is recommended. Details are regulated by §§ 355, 356 Building Code. If the client has no interest in continuing the contract and thus no obligation to pay commission arises, the withdrawal becomes unnecessary."

"The agent is legally obliged to inform the client about their right of withdrawal in accordance with the statutory provisions. He must 'inform' him. The law does not allow the client to waive their right of withdrawal. ..."

So if it did come to court, dismissal of the lawsuit would be more than likely.
Of course, everyone (?) knows the saying:
"In court and at sea, we are in God’s hands alone."
In such a case, however, the circumstances would be unambiguous.
If he did not properly inform, the withdrawal period is extended by 12 months.