You already knew the offered house before contacting the brokerage company. After the purchase, a commission is nevertheless demanded. Your recollection "I already knew the house" is a starting point, but not a complete examination. It depends on what you already knew and what the subsequent activity contributed to the actual conclusion.
Describe the earlier knowledge concretely
Our editorial recommendation: Secure the original source with date and content. Separate the knowledge of a building from information about a concrete sales opportunity and the appropriate contact person. A photo taken on a walk initially proves something different from a prior direct purchase negotiation.
Do not invent missing details afterwards from current records. If you no longer have a message or an earlier exposé, that remains a named evidentiary gap. Even an existing document must correspond to the object actually purchased later and to the state of affairs at that time.
Continue to check the contractual status
§652 BGB links the entitlement to remuneration to a corresponding promise and the conclusion of a contract as a result of proof or brokerage. [ERFOLGSBEZUG] The existence of an effective agreement therefore remains a separate prerequisite. This article does not assume that every receipt of an exposé or every viewing already constitutes a legally effective contract today.
Present the actual agreement and all declarations relevant to it. This article does not repeat the general examination of text form. It focuses on the additional objection that the purchase opportunity was already known beforehand.
Do not judge the later activity solely by its first indication
The BGH distinguishes in judgment III ZR 530/13 the provision of proof from the question of causation. Prior knowledge can be significant for this second question. A further substantial activity can nonetheless at least be causally contributory to the conclusion. [VORKENNTNIS]
This does not result in an automatic commission for every additional e-mail and no blanket exemption through the earlier object indication. Instead, set out which later information, contacts or steps actually took place. Their legal significance will be assessed in the context of the entire process.
Fictional case: Known building, subsequently established negotiation contact
A buyer had already seen a house in an older advertisement. Later a company establishes direct contact with a person acting for the selling side and participates in the further process. After completion, the buyer refers solely to the old advertisement.
She now separates the exact content of the earlier information and the subsequent activities. The consultation examines the contract, prior knowledge and the actual connection to the conclusion. The example does not confirm an obligation to pay commission; in particular, not every passing on of contact is automatically assessed as a substantial service.
Submit the objection with a complete chronology
Prepare a chronological presentation of the earlier source, the later contact, the actual activities and the purchase conclusion. Indicate which points are confirmed or disputed. A clear factual account is more helpful than the blanket statement that a known object can never again be relevant for commission.
In the case of a disputed claim, have it examined which declaration and evidence are required. The text does not create an invoice objection and does not provide instructions to conceal performed activities. The aim is a comprehensible assessment of the concrete causal connection to success.