The situation every Dubai agent eventually faces
You spent three months working a buyer. Viewings in JVC, counteroffers on a Business Bay unit, a long weekend of WhatsApp negotiation that ended with the seller accepting. Then something shifts — you resign, the agency lets you go, or you move to a bigger brokerage because the deal on the table was too good to refuse. The Form F gets signed two weeks after you walk out the door. The buyer pays. The commission lands at your old agency.
Does any of that money reach you?
The honest answer: it depends entirely on what was agreed in writing, when it was agreed, and who holds the paper. That is the core of this article. Not theory — the mechanics of how commission moves (or stops moving) when an agent changes agency while a deal is still alive.
Two separate problems agents confuse as one
When agents talk about “changing agency mid-deal,” they usually mean one of two distinct situations, and these situations have different legal frameworks, different paperwork, and different outcomes:
Situation A: You are the employed agent and you leave your agency while a deal you originated is still in progress. The deal is between your old agency and the client. You personally have no contract with the buyer or seller — your agency does, via Form A (the listing agreement) or Form B (the buyer representation agreement). Your entitlement to commission from that deal runs through your employment contract with your agency, not through RERA.
Situation B: Your agency is mid-deal in a co-broke arrangement with another agency, and something changes on one side — an agent moves, a team splits, or the introducing agency changes structure. Here the relevant instrument is Form I, the inter-agency co-broking agreement. This is where RERA’s framework becomes directly relevant to whether money actually arrives.
Most articles conflate these two situations. They are not the same. Handle them the same way and you will either leave money behind or wait years for a payment that never comes.
Situation A: You leave your agency. The deal is still open.
Your contract with the client was never yours
Commission in Dubai becomes legally payable once a signed representation is in place and the transaction the agent was engaged to complete actually goes ahead. In Dubai, that representation is documented on a RERA form generated through the Trakheesi permit system — the form, not a viewing or a phone call, is what establishes entitlement to a fee.
What this means in practice: the Form A or Form B is in the agency’s name, not yours personally. The client’s contractual relationship is with the brokerage — the ORN holder, the licensed entity. You are the human doing the work, but the instrument that entitles anyone to be paid is the agency’s form. Practising agents must be registered with RERA and hold a broker card with a broker registration number (BRN), but that BRN links you to an agency. When you leave, the BRN moves with you; the Form A or Form B does not.
This is why, when an agent leaves mid-deal, the commission from that deal is almost always paid to the old agency first. The agency then decides whether to honour any internal commitment to pass a share to the agent who originated the deal.
What determines whether your old agency pays you
Your case is not straightforward if you do not have written proof that the company will honour your commission now that you have left their employment. Leaving before the transaction was concluded can weaken your position.
The key documents are:
- Your employment contract. Does it define what happens to commission on deals you originated if you are no longer employed when the deal closes? Many standard Dubai brokerage employment contracts are silent on this point, which leaves the agent exposed. Contracts must clearly specify payment calculation methods, commission rates, and payment schedules to provide legal protection for both parties.
- Any written confirmation from the agency — email, WhatsApp, internal memo — that they would pay you commission on specific named deals after your departure. This is not a trivial thing to have in writing. All you can reasonably do is keep communications open with your old agency and wait until they have been paid. RERA or the labour department will not be of help at this stage.
- Proof that you were the originating agent. Viewing logs, email chains with the buyer, your name on the listing notes. None of these constitute a legal entitlement on their own, but they support any internal or labour claim you make later.
Where the dispute lands if the agency refuses to pay
If the agency collects commission on your deal and refuses to share it with you after you leave, this is a labour dispute — not a RERA dispute. Complaints about broker conduct go to the DLD/RERA. The Dubai Land Department regulates registered brokers and handles complaints about broker conduct. But the relationship between an employed agent and their agency over unpaid internal commission falls under UAE labour law. When you get proof that the buyer has finally paid the commission, you can press ahead with the company for your fee. If they refuse, the Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratisation (MOHRE) and the labour courts are the route — not RERA’s brokerage conduct channels.
This distinction matters. Agents waste months filing complaints with the wrong body. RERA can discipline a brokerage for regulatory breaches, but it does not adjudicate internal pay disputes between an agency and its employed agents.
The protection you should have built before you left
If you knew you were leaving while deals were live, the time to negotiate was before you signed the resignation, not after. An email from your agency head that explicitly names the deal, names the commission amount or percentage you will receive, and states the trigger point (MOU signing, or title transfer) is enforceable as part of your employment terms. Without it, you are relying on goodwill from people who now have a financial incentive to classify the deal as one their remaining agents closed.
This is not about mistrust. It is about the fact that Dubai’s transactional pipeline is long, and people forget. A verbal agreement about commission splits — even between colleagues who genuinely like each other — corrodes quickly once you are no longer in the same office.
Verbal agreements on commission are not enforceable under RERA dispute resolution. The same logic applies internally: if it is not in writing, it did not happen.
Situation B: Two agencies co-broking, and something changes mid-deal
How the co-broking split is supposed to work
When your agent comes across a listing managed by another broker, the two agents can sign a Form I — a broker-to-broker agreement that outlines how they will split responsibilities and commission.
Form I comes into play when two RERA-certified agents, one representing the seller and the other the buyer, decide to collaborate. This formal agreement is designed to safeguard the clients and listings of both agents. It explicitly outlines the commission split between them, solidifying a professional commitment between the collaborating agents.
Key aspects of Form I include a clearly defined commission split between the listing agent and the buyer’s agent, provisions ensuring both agents adhere to RERA’s code of ethics, and role definition — specifying which agent is responsible for particular tasks, such as coordinating with the developer or attending the final transfer at the Trustee office.
The commission split agreement in Form I is commonly 50/50, though this is convention, not a rule. Some deals run 60/40 or other splits depending on who is holding the listing, who introduced the buyer, and what was negotiated. The only thing that matters is that the agreed percentage is written into the signed Form I before either side does anything else.
What happens when Form I is missing
Form I’s primary purpose is to protect the agents and ensure the transaction remains professional and transparent. Without this form, there is no legal protection regarding how the deal is handled between the two agencies.
When an agent changes agency mid-deal and there is no signed Form I in place, the situation becomes genuinely messy. The listing agency holds the Form A. The buyer’s agency holds the Form B. The client pays commission on Form F (the MOU / sale and purchase contract). Form F includes details such as terms and conditions, the property’s specifics, the agreed rate, and commission splits for both the buyer’s and seller’s agents. If those splits were never formalised in a signed Form I, there is no binding agreement between the two agencies about what each receives.
Now imagine the agent who introduced the buyer moves to a new agency during that gap. Suddenly two agencies are claiming they represent the buying side. The original agency says the deal belongs to them. The new agency says their agent brought the client. The client, if they signed a new Form B with the new agency, has technically changed representation — which creates a second set of problems around whether the original introduction is still live.
A single transaction can involve a primary agent, a co-broking arrangement, a developer incentive, and a referral fee owed to an external agency — all requiring separate calculation rules and documented payout records. Attempting to manage these variables without proper documentation creates the conditions for chronic errors: wrong split percentages applied to the wrong deal type, and disbursements delayed because no one can confirm which version of the commission agreement is the authoritative one.
The “introduction period” problem
Dubai’s secondary market does not generally operate on exclusive mandates. The DLD’s three-broker rule, established in October 2022, states that a property cannot be listed with more than three brokers at a time. This means a seller can have multiple agencies working the same listing simultaneously, and a buyer can interact with multiple agents — which makes the concept of “who introduced whom” particularly fraught.
When an agent moves agencies, the question of who owns the introduction becomes live. If an agent spent six weeks walking a client through viewings, built the relationship, and then moved agencies — does the introduction belong to the agency that employed them during those six weeks, or to the agent personally who has now taken that relationship to a new brokerage?
Protecting yourself means confirming that the agency agreement has a clear expiry date and a clause defining the “introduction period” (usually 90 days). Most Form A agreements include a period during which a client who was introduced by that agency remains “owned” by the agency — even if the agent who introduced them has left. If you moved agencies and your buyer was introduced within your old agency’s introduction period, the old agency has a legitimate claim to be the introducing party, and therefore to a share of the commission — regardless of whether you are still there.
This is not an abstract risk. It is the most common scenario behind co-broking disputes in Dubai. An agent moves, takes a warm buyer with them, closes the deal at the new agency, and the old agency files a complaint because the introduction happened on their watch, under their Form A or Form B.
When the money actually moves — and why it stalls
The moment commission is earned
Most agents consider commission earned when the buyer and seller sign the MOU (Form F). This is the standard expectation and is supported by RERA in disputes. Even when commission is “earned” at MOU, payment may be structured as a portion at MOU and the remainder at transfer.
For rental deals, the timing is different: commission is due when the Ejari-registered tenancy contract is signed and the security deposit and first cheque are handed over. In rental transactions, the post-dated cheque structure common in Dubai adds a further wrinkle — the landlord may hold several months of post-dated cheques before any of them clear, and the agent’s commission is typically due at signing, not when each cheque is cashed.
For off-plan deals, the mechanics change again. Dubai’s escrow law requires developers to hold buyer funds in DLD-supervised accounts until construction milestones are certified. Developer commission is paid from these regulated accounts and is subject to the developer’s own payment schedule — often milestone-linked, not immediate. If you move agency mid-way through an off-plan pipeline where developer commission is still outstanding, the commission will be paid to the agency on record at the time of payment, not necessarily to the agency that originated the sale.
Why payment stalls when an agent has moved
Payment stalls for one dominant reason: nobody can agree on the split. The total commission is sitting at the listing agency, or it has arrived at one agency, and the other agency is disputing either the amount or the entitlement. Because there is no signed Form I, or the Form I predates the agent’s move and the split it records no longer reflects the current situation, neither side will release payment until the dispute is resolved.
Meanwhile, the agent who actually did the work — at either agency — is waiting. The money exists. It is just stuck.
The key milestone of MOU signing (Form F) is when most agents consider commission earned, and this is supported by RERA in disputes. But “earned” and “paid” are not the same event in Dubai real estate, and the gap between them is where disputes live.
This is why the structure of how and when the split is agreed matters more than almost any other single factor in a Dubai co-broke transaction. If the split is agreed before the Form F is signed — ideally before the client is even introduced to the property — there is nothing to dispute. The money arrives and each agency releases its agents’ shares according to their internal policies.
If the split is not agreed before the client pays, every party is negotiating under pressure, with the money already in someone’s account, and no signed document to resolve the disagreement.
What happens at the RERA / RDSC when things go wrong
When a commission dispute cannot be resolved between agencies directly, the route is the RERA dispute resolution mechanism. If a commission dispute arises, RERA’s dispute resolution process handles the case. Having a written agreement is essential to win any dispute.
The Rental Disputes Settlement Centre (RDSC) handles disputes related to tenancies. The RDSC handles landlord-tenant disputes about the tenancy itself. Commission disputes between agencies over a rental deal are not the same as tenancy disputes and should be directed to the appropriate DLD/RERA channels, not to the RDSC — another common routing error that wastes months.
When a dispute reaches RERA, the adjudicators look for documented agreements. RERA sets guidelines for brokerage activities, including licensing agents, enforcing compliance, and resolving disputes between parties involved in real estate transactions. But RERA cannot invent an agreement that the agents did not sign. If the only evidence of the split is a WhatsApp conversation that both parties read differently, the outcome is genuinely uncertain.
Having a written agreement is essential to win any dispute. This is not a principle that only becomes important when things go wrong. It is the principle that prevents things from going wrong in the first place.
The VAT dimension
This is rarely discussed but cannot be ignored. All commissions are subject to 5% VAT under UAE law. When an agency issues a commission invoice, it must be a valid VAT invoice from a registered entity. Real estate brokerage fees are subject to 5% VAT, making it important to clarify if your agent’s quote is VAT-inclusive.
When an agent moves agencies mid-deal, the VAT invoice question becomes immediate: which agency issues the invoice? The answer should be the agency that holds the signed representation agreement with the client — but when the agent has moved and taken the client relationship with them, both agencies may believe they are entitled to issue the invoice. Two invoices for the same deal create a compliance problem for the client and a tax exposure for whichever agency invoiced incorrectly.
The resolution is the same as for the commission split: get the split agreed and documented before the deal closes, and determine which entity issues which invoice at the same time.
The practical checklist: before you change agency
If you are an agent considering a move while deals are live, run through this before you resign:
- List every open deal by stage. Is it pre-MOU? Post-MOU but pre-transfer? Off-plan with a developer commission outstanding? Each stage has different risk and different leverage for negotiating your exit terms.
- Get written confirmation from your current agency on what happens to commission from each named deal. Do not accept verbal assurances. Email is the minimum; a short addendum to your exit agreement is better.
- Check every Form A and Form B you are associated with for the introduction period clause. If your buyer was introduced under your current agency’s form and that period has not expired, the introduction belongs to the agency, not to you personally.
- Ensure any co-broking deals have a signed Form I before you leave. If they do not, advocate for one to be signed before your last day — even if the deal is months from closing.
- Understand your new agency’s policy on incoming deals. Some agencies refuse to take commission on deals an incoming agent brings unless the documentation is clean. Others will take the deal but will expect you to handle any dispute with your old agency yourself.
If you are a team leader or principal at an agency taking on an agent from a competitor mid-pipeline, the same logic applies in reverse. Before that agent’s deals become your deals, audit the paperwork. A deal that arrives without a signed Form I, with an active introduction period still running at the previous agency, and with a verbal co-broking arrangement, is not an asset — it is a liability dressed as an opportunity.
The principle that removes all of this friction
The disputes described in this article — the delayed payments, the RERA filings, the labour claims, the VAT invoice arguments — almost never arise when two things happen at the same time:
First, the split between all parties is agreed and signed before the client pays. Not after the Form F. Not when the transfer appointment is booked. Before. A signed Form I that records the exact percentage, the names of both agencies, and the property in question is the document that prevents an argument from starting. Form I protects both agents from commission disputes, and it is mandatory when two agents are co-broking a deal.
Second, every party is paid at once, from the same transaction event. When one agency collects and is then expected to transfer a share to another agency — and that transfer depends on goodwill, a correct bank transfer, and everyone agreeing on the amount after the fact — the friction is structural. Money that has landed in one account and needs to leave again is money that is at risk.
The ideal state is not complicated to describe. The split is documented before the deal closes. The commission from the client flows to both agencies simultaneously, in agreed proportions, at the same trigger event — whether that is Form F signing or title transfer. Each agency then releases its share to the relevant agent according to its internal employment terms, which themselves should be in writing.
When that sequence is in place, changing agency mid-deal becomes a personnel question, not a financial crisis. The paperwork already defines who gets what, regardless of who is still sitting in which office. The agent who moved does not need to chase. The old agency does not need to decide whether to be generous. The new agency does not inherit a dispute.
That outcome — split agreed upfront, all parties paid at the same moment, nothing left to argue about — is achievable on every co-broke deal in Dubai. It requires one conversation earlier than agents usually have it, and one signed form earlier than agents usually produce it. The agents who make that their standard practice are the ones who get paid on time, keep their professional relationships intact, and do not spend their evenings writing RERA complaint letters.
