The Call That Sounds Like Good News
Your phone rings on a Tuesday morning. A buyer’s agent at another brokerage has a client ready to view the listing you’ve been marketing for six weeks. He’s seen the price, seen the floor plan, and he wants to move quickly. You say yes, you share the viewing slot, and by Thursday afternoon there’s a verbal offer on the table.
Now ask yourself one question: what exactly did you agree to split, and where is that agreement in writing?
If the answer is “we said 50/50 on the phone” or “we’ll sort it out when the deal closes,” you’re standing at the edge of one of Dubai real estate’s most common and most painful disputes — not with the buyer, not with the seller, but with the agent who was supposed to be your counterpart on the deal.
This is where experienced agents get caught just as often as new ones. The pressure of the deal, the excitement of a genuine buyer, the fear of losing the momentum — all of it conspires to push the conversation about the split off to “later.” Later, in this market, is where commissions disappear.
Why the Split Conversation Gets Avoided
There’s a social dynamic at play that nobody talks about honestly. When a buyer’s agent calls you with a real client, asking immediately about commission splits can feel transactional in a way that threatens the goodwill of the collaboration. Nobody wants to be the one who slows down a live deal with paperwork. There’s also the optimism problem: both sides assume the other side wants the same thing, so neither pushes to confirm it in writing.
But the market doesn’t care about goodwill. When two brokers collaborate on a deal, the commission structure must be agreed upon in advance — without a clear agent-to-agent agreement, many agents end up in costly disputes or losing their commission entirely.
The other dynamic is the “I’ll follow the other agent’s lead” trap. An agent with a strong listing sometimes assumes that whoever brings the buyer will naturally accept whatever split is offered after the fact. A buyer’s agent with a committed client sometimes assumes the listing agent will be generous because they need the deal closed. Both assumptions are wrong, and both create the conditions for a standoff at the worst possible moment — after the client has already paid.
What the Regulations Say, and What They Don’t
When two agents work together on one deal — one representing the buyer, the other the seller — Dubai requires them to use an agent-to-agent agreement known as Form I. This form ensures both agents get their fair share of the commission.
Commission agreements between agents on a co-broke deal are governed by RERA Form I, which must be formally signed before any commission is disbursed. This prevents the informal arrangements that create disputes in less regulated markets and gives both parties a documented, enforceable position.
Form A (listing agreement), Form B (buyer representation agreement), Form F (memorandum of understanding), and Form I (final commission agreement) are the standard RERA forms that govern the agency relationship and commission obligations in a transaction. These forms need to be signed before an agent can legally claim commission on a deal.
That last sentence is the one agents underestimate. It is not a bureaucratic technicality. It is the line that determines whether you have any enforceable claim at all.
Verbal agreements are extremely difficult to enforce in Dubai. The WhatsApp message that says “yes let’s do 50/50” is not Form I. It might be evidence of an intention, but it is not an approved brokerage contract, and the DLD arbitration system operates on documented, registered agreements. Courts in the UAE have made this stark. An Abu Dhabi Commercial Court dismissed a lawsuit filed by a real estate broker seeking Dh117,000 in commission from a property owner, ruling that no approved written brokerage contract had been registered as required by law. The broker submitted WhatsApp correspondence, his trade licence, and property documents — and still lost, because regulations require brokers to conclude a written brokerage contract using the approved template, registered in the real estate development register before receiving any funds, and the case file contained no such registered written contract.
That case was agent-to-client. The principle applies with equal force agent-to-agent.
The Specific Moments When the Split Goes Wrong
Understanding when a split dispute ignites is more useful than general warnings about documentation. There are four recurring pressure points in Dubai deals.
At the offer stage
A buyer’s agent calls with a client, the listing agent confirms a viewing, and the deal moves fast. No one stops to formalise the split because it feels premature — “let’s see if the offer lands first.” The offer does land. The seller accepts. Now both agents are invested, the client is excited, and raising the split question feels like it might derail everything. This is when agents accept worse terms than they should, or accept vague terms they later interpret differently.
After the Form F is signed
Form F — the Memorandum of Understanding — includes the financial and property details as well as the commission paid to the buyers’ and sellers’ agents, and becomes valid only after it has been signed by both parties in the presence of witnesses and dated by the agent. An agent who has not documented the inter-agent split before Form F is signed now faces a signed client document that says commission is X%, but no agent-to-agent document that confirms what percentage of X they personally receive. The commission exists. Their share of it doesn’t, on paper.
At the point of payment
In secondary market sales in Dubai, commission should be paid by cheque made out to the brokerage, not to the individual agent personally — this is a RERA requirement, and it creates a paper trail that protects both parties if a dispute arises later. This matters because the money goes to the brokerage first. If the inter-agent split has not been documented, the receiving brokerage has no obligation to route funds to the co-broking brokerage on any specific timeline, or at any specific percentage that was discussed verbally. The dispute then moves from agent-to-agent to brokerage-to-brokerage, which takes longer, costs more, and produces worse outcomes for the individual agent who did the work.
On rental deals with post-dated cheques
In Ejari-registered rental transactions, the tenant typically issues post-dated cheques for the rent — sometimes for the full year upfront, sometimes in instalments. A tenancy contract without Ejari registration has no legal standing in Dubai. What agents sometimes miss is that commission is typically collected at signing, as a separate instrument, not from the rental cheques themselves. When two agents are working a rental deal with no documented split, and the commission cheque arrives at one brokerage, there is no automatic mechanism to redirect half of it anywhere. The agent who wrote up the tenancy agreement is in a structurally stronger position to claim the full fee. The agent who brought the tenant — without a signed agreement — is chasing a phone call.
What “No Written Split” Actually Costs You
It is worth being direct about what the exposure looks like in real numbers.
Sales commission in Dubai is standardly 2% of the sale price plus 5% VAT. Rental commission is standardly 5% of annual rent. On a mid-market sale at AED 2 million, that is AED 40,000 in gross commission, plus VAT. On a co-broke deal, the expected split might be AED 20,000 to each side. That is the amount at risk when the agreement is not in writing.
In Dubai, the commonly accepted standards for agent-to-agent splits run 50/50 on sale and rental transactions, though on exclusive listings the listing agent may offer a smaller split such as 60/40 if they hold exclusive rights. There is no rule that compels the 50/50. There is no official law dictating the exact split for agent-to-agent commissions. What you agree, and document, is what governs. If you have nothing documented, the other side has full discretion — and full incentive to minimize what they send your way.
If a commission dispute arises, RERA’s dispute resolution mechanisms handle the case — and having a written agreement is essential to win any dispute. Without one, you are not just in a weaker position; you may have no position at all.
The Signals That Should Make You Walk Away
Not every co-broke lead is worth taking. Here are the specific signals that indicate the deal in front of you is a commission dispute waiting to happen.
The other agent deflects the split conversation. You raise it — politely, professionally — before the viewing or before sharing your seller’s details, and the response is “let’s not worry about that now” or “we’ll sort it out when the deal comes together.” That deflection is the signal. Agents who intend to honour a split are not afraid to document it. Agents who plan to minimise or contest it later need to keep the conversation vague for as long as possible.
The split being offered is conditional. “I’ll give you 30% if it closes above the asking price.” “We’ll do 50/50 unless the seller negotiates the commission down.” Any split tied to a condition that hasn’t been documented and agreed in the same Form I creates ambiguity that will be exploited. The split needs to be a fixed number or percentage, agreed at the start, not a moving target.
The other agent does not have a valid RERA licence. Every real estate agent operating in Dubai must hold a valid RERA licence — this is not optional. An unlicensed agent cannot legally collect commission, and any commission paid to an unlicensed agent is not protected under UAE law if a dispute arises. If you cannot verify the other agent’s RERA registration — their Broker Registration Number — before the deal starts, you are not just at risk of a split dispute. You are potentially involved in an unregulated transaction.
The brokerage structure is unclear. Agents do not keep the full commission themselves — they typically split it with their brokerage, commonly 50/50, though the split varies by company policy. If the agent calling you cannot tell you clearly which brokerage will be issuing or receiving the commission cheque, and if that brokerage does not have a clear inter-brokerage agreement with your agency, the money will pass through a structure that you are not a party to and cannot enforce against.
They want to move directly to Form F without Form I. This is the most common manoeuvre in a contentious co-broke, and the most dangerous. Once Form F is signed and the client’s deposit is in play, everyone’s attention moves to completing the transaction. Your leverage to negotiate the agent-to-agent split drops to near zero. If a counterpart is pushing hard to get to Form F before Form I is signed, that is not enthusiasm — it is a negotiating strategy.
When Walking Away Is the Right Business Decision
Walking away from a deal feels expensive. It rarely is, compared to the alternative.
Consider the cashflow reality. You spend six weeks marketing a listing, you run two or three viewings, you negotiate with a seller who has specific requirements, you get a buyer to an acceptable offer — and then you spend another six to eight weeks chasing a split that was never properly agreed. That is ten to fourteen weeks of effort and time, plus the opportunity cost of the deals you didn’t pursue because this one was “almost there.”
If a co-broking agent refuses to sign Form I before proceeding, the professional response is to state clearly that you cannot continue without it. Not aggressively — constructively. “I need us to document the split before we go further; that protects both of us.” If that position is met with resistance or delay, you have your answer about how this person intends to handle the money at the end.
There is also a reputational dimension that works in your favour here. Agents who consistently insist on documented splits before deals begin build a reputation in the market for being clean to work with. That reputation attracts better co-broking leads, not fewer. Counterparts know that a deal with you will be documented, paid correctly, and closed without a dispute. That is worth more, over a career, than the occasional deal you walked away from because the other agent wouldn’t sign a form.
How Disputes Actually Resolve — And Why It Takes So Long
When a split dispute does reach a formal complaint with RERA or DLD, the Dubai Land Department regulates registered brokers and handles complaints about broker conduct — covering unregistered practice, misrepresentation, and fee disputes with a brokerage. The RDSC — the Rental Disputes Settlement Centre — is the specialised judicial body established by the Dubai government to resolve disputes between landlords and tenants, handling cases from unpaid rent through to deposit disputes, typically faster and more affordably than Dubai’s civil courts. For inter-agent commission disputes on sales, the route runs through DLD’s complaint process and, where necessary, formal arbitration.
The word “faster” is relative. Formal dispute resolution takes weeks at minimum, often months. You will need to produce documentation — every WhatsApp exchange, every email, every piece of evidence that an agreement existed and on what terms. Document all conversations, whether via email, chat, or written letters, as proof if the dispute escalates later. Even with that documentation, the outcome is uncertain if you cannot produce a signed, RERA-compliant form.
Meanwhile, the deal has closed. The client has moved in or taken ownership. The commission has been paid to someone’s brokerage. You are fighting for money that is already sitting in someone else’s account, through a process that costs you time, legal fees, and stress — and you have no guarantee of winning.
That is the full picture of a split dispute without written documentation. It is not a recoverable situation once it starts. It has to be prevented before the deal moves.
What the Right Conversation Looks Like
There is nothing unusual about raising the split before a deal is committed. It is normal, professional practice. The conversation happens at the point of first contact — before you share property access details, before you confirm a viewing, before you put the seller’s expectations in writing.
It can be as direct as: “Before we go further, let’s agree the split and put it on Form I. What are you offering?” That one question, asked early, does two things simultaneously. It signals that you are a professional who works with documentation, and it reveals immediately whether the agent on the other end operates the same way.
The answer tells you everything. An agent who responds with a specific number and says “let’s get it signed today” is the counterpart you want. An agent who changes the subject, delays, conditions the answer, or expresses surprise that you’re asking — that is the signal to slow down and protect yourself before moving further.
When multiple agents are involved in a single listing, the commission is typically split among them — and clear agreements should be in place from the start. That is not idealism. It is the minimum standard that the market requires.
The Principle That Removes the Friction
Every commission dispute in a co-broke deal shares the same root structure: the split was agreed in concept but not in writing, and the payment came later, to one party, with the other party then having to ask — or fight — for their portion.
The friction disappears when you do three things simultaneously, at the start:
- Agree the split in specific, documented terms before any deal mechanics are set in motion
- Sign Form I before Form F is anywhere near the table
- Ensure that the payment flows to both sides at the time the client pays, not in sequence
That third point is underappreciated. When commission is paid to one brokerage and then expected to flow to another later, every day that passes creates a new opportunity for delay, dispute, or renegotiation. When both sides are paid at the moment the transaction is completed, there is no “later.” There is no outstanding obligation to chase. There is no power imbalance created by one party holding funds that partly belong to another.
In a dual-agency dispute, the paper trail determines the outcome. In any co-broke dispute, the same is true. The agent with the documented, signed, RERA-compliant agreement wins. The agent who relied on a conversation wins nothing, regardless of how much work they did, how clear the verbal agreement seemed, or how certain they were that the other side would “do the right thing.”
The right thing, in this market, is paper. Get it signed before the deal moves. Every time.
