Estate agent dual fees

[Jsbbwv1]

I am wondering if anyone can help?

I gave notice to an estate agent who I'd engaged to sell my property, and who had not performed. Just as their contract period came to an end they claimed they'd had interest from a buyer on the basis of their marketing but had not actually arranged a viewing. They claimed that if that buyer subsequently viewed via a new agent and made an offer, they would still claim the fee as they had introduced them to the property.

A couple of months later, the buyer has viewed the property via the new agent and made an offer

The agreement I signed with the first agent doesn't specify what constitutes an introduction but they subsequently told me that they introduced the buyer through marketing the property for sale - as far as I am aware this amounted to a listing on Rightmove and Zoopla. They didn't facilitate a viewing of the property and have confirmed this in writing.

My question is - are they right to claim that they made an effective introduction just by advertising the property which a potential buyer contacted them about, but which didn't lead to a viewing? I don't think they are and nor does the new agent. The Property ombudsman says.
"An effective introduction must evidence that the agent carried out an act that initiated the buyer’s reaction to the property. As such, there is a need for a defined transaction event to occur. In our view, this can be most clearly evidenced by an agent carrying out a viewing. However, please bear in mind that this is not an exhaustive list."

This also suggests what the original agent is saying is not a real introduction but it's not completely definitive in my reading

Basically I don't know what to do as I don't want to incur 2 fees but nor do I want to lose the buyer.

[atticus]

Your choice is this.

1. sell to this buyer and then defend litigation. My understanding is that the court looks at whether this agent was the effective source of the introduction leading to the sale. On this basis I think you would have a good chance of winning the case. However, this cannot be guaranteed, and you would also have the cost and hassle if the first agent does sue.

2. Find another buyer.

[Jsbbwv1]

Thank you, this is very helpful. Do you think I should try and ask the first agent to reconsider or would this not be advisable with the future possible event of litigation?

[islandgirl]

I think I would be saying (in a polite and subtle way) to the first agent that I do not really believe them and am very surprised by their stance and asking for physical proof that they "introduced" them

[atticus]

By all means reply. I would emphasise the stance that they were not the effective source of the introduction leading to the sale, that this potential buyer first viewed the property on [date], arranged by [name of new agent].

[atticus]

This article is worth reading. Read the discussion of the Foxtons case.

https://www.hilldickinson.com/insigh...cause%E2%80%99