Property purchase - When is a broker's commission due?

Well, in any case, I discovered in an email that the property actually belongs to the city. So I called there and clarified everything else with them, made contracts, scheduled a notary appointment, etc. The city official also said that they had no contracts with the real estate agency.

And with that, you give yourself the answer: without the hint in an email from the broker, you wouldn’t have gotten the property at all => commission is due.

It is also said: "The broker has no claim, for example, if the municipality exercises its right of first refusal, if there is no buildability of a property, or if the contract is successfully contested due to fraud or error." After all, I bought directly from the city.

Hello Tobias,

this is not as clear-cut as my predecessors think...

well, mine is not quite as nice, because today unexpectedly a commission of almost 10,000,- arrived from a broker.
He had actually offered a house with the plot of land, which I had looked at. But he also said that the plot would be available without the house. He did not inform me about any costs for the brokerage.
Well, anyway, I discovered in an email that the plot belongs to the city. So I called them and clarified everything further, made contracts, notary appointment, etc. The city official also said they have no contracts with the brokerage company.
Now, not even 2 weeks after the notary appointment, the invoice with the commission came directly.
Is this really lawful? I also read somewhere that when buying from a municipality or city, there is a pre-emption right and no commission is due.

You only learned about the plot through the broker; this normally triggers a broker’s commission. The matter becomes a bit problematic because the broker advertised the plot without the city’s mandate. By the way, municipalities/cities rarely use brokers as intermediaries.

On the other hand, this approach is not unusual; Scout & Co. are full of such listings and the respective municipalities/cities do quite well from this arrangement, even though they always have to phrase it differently.

"The broker has no claim, for example, if the municipality exercises its pre-emptive right, if there is a lack of building feasibility of a plot, or if the contract is successfully challenged due to fraud or error."
After all, I bought directly from the city.

This is a completely normal clause you find in any notary contract and does not at all mean you as the buyer are exempted from the municipality’s side, but actually the municipality in case they themselves use the plot – build on it or reserve it for later purposes.

From a gut feeling, I would say you are obliged to pay the invoice or will only achieve a suspension through a lengthy legal dispute. Therefore, I would suggest contacting the brokerage office and see if a compromise – maybe meeting halfway – is possible. If the broker refuses, your only options are to pay the full amount or consult your trusted lawyer – with an uncertain outcome and additional costs for the lawyer and possibly advance payment of court fees.

Rhenish regards

See it the same way, without the email none of this would have happened. In my opinion, the commission is therefore due.

Good evening,

So, I did some research.
The broker operates as a GbR company. The company headquarters is a rundown multi-family house. One of the managing directors was found on the nameplate, but otherwise no indication of the company itself. There is no own website either.

A GbR has no company name, but consists of 2 or more natural persons who have joined together as a GbR. A website is not required for brokerage activities.

The invoice also does not specify a VAT identification number or tax number.

You are in "good" company there; that also happens with other invoicing parties.

Also not on the websites, not even in the imprint. There are always some mobile phone numbers given.

Up above you still write that there is no website :confused:

I estimate that this is a dubious two-man operation that simply goes and searches the internet for commission-free properties or land and then offers *** commission themselves without the sellers' knowledge.
The whole thing is too vague for me and unfortunately probably a case for a lawyer after all.

The fact remains that you only learned about the property through this broker. I have already written about the lawyer issue.

By the way, accusations are an unpleasant matter; having made them - especially in a public area - I would be very careful if I were you.

Rhenish regards

So, I did some research. The broker operates as a GbR company. The company headquarters is a run-down multi-family house. The nameplate showed one of the managing directors, but otherwise no indication of the company itself. There is also no own website. The invoice also does not indicate a VAT identification number or tax number. Also not on the websites, nor in the imprint. There are always some mobile phone numbers indicated. I guess it is a dubious two-person operation that simply goes online to look for commission-free real estate or land and then offers *** commission themselves without the sellers' knowledge. The whole thing is too vague for me and unfortunately probably a case for a lawyer.

As Bauexperte already says: that doesn’t have to mean anything. Since I myself work part-time for brokers in ******, I know quite a few in my region. Some do not have an office open to the public but have a car and a mobile phone – that is enough for brokerage. Older brokers who have been self-employed for 30 years or longer can often do without their own website. @Bauexperte, *** websites he probably means the real estate portals, where the ver***lers get an imprint.