The deal closed. Now the other agent wants more.
The Form F is signed. The buyer’s manager called to say the transfer is booked at the trustee office. You are already calculating what hits your account next week. Then the other agent’s broker calls.
“We agreed sixty-forty in your favour. My agent is saying it was fifty-fifty.”
You are certain it was sixty-forty. You brought the buyer, you ran the viewings, you negotiated the price reduction, you chased the NOC. The other side listed the property and opened the door twice. Sixty-forty was fair. You said it on the phone before the first viewing. The other agent said “yeah fine.” That was three weeks ago.
Now it is a problem.
This situation is not rare in Dubai. In fast-moving markets, agents sometimes proceed on trust or a phone call agreement when time is short — and this almost always creates problems if the deal becomes complicated. It plays out on secondary market resales, on rental co-broking, and increasingly on off-plan deals where two agencies have both registered with a developer and one agent introduces a buyer through the other’s allocation. The mechanism is slightly different each time. The core problem is identical: two people remember the same conversation differently, and one of them is wrong — or both of them are rounding in their favour.
This article is about what you do when you are already in the dispute, and — more importantly — what you set up before the next deal so you never have this conversation again.
Why “we agreed verbally” is not a position
Let’s be direct about the legal reality first. A verbal commission split agreement is not enforceable under RERA regulations. If a dispute arises between two agents over who is owed what, the agent without a signed Form I is in a very weak position.
RERA created Form I, which is used when two RERA-certified agents agree to work together. A Form I ensures that both agents’ listings and clients are protected and promotes agents working together, regardless of which real estate company they represent.
Form I is also known as the “Agent to Agent Agreement.” The form outlines the agreement terms between the two agents, including the commission split between them upon the successful sale of the property.
The agent-to-agent agreement specifies the property in question, the names and RERA registration details of both agents, the commission split arrangement, confidentiality obligations regarding client information, and terms governing how the agents will cooperate through the transaction.
This is not bureaucracy for its own sake. Without Form I, the buyer’s agent risks the listing agent approaching the buyer directly and cutting them out of the commission. Equally, the listing agent risks the buyer going back to the seller independently and removing the listing agent from the deal. The form creates mutual accountability and makes the commission split legally enforceable.
The Form I is what converts a verbal handshake into something a regulator or a court can read. Without it, you are arguing one person’s memory against another’s. That argument has no winner — only legal fees and a damaged relationship.
What happens when the split is disputed
Both agencies hold the commission
The most common scenario in a Dubai resale: the buyer pays the buyer’s agent. The seller pays the listing agent. Each commission flows to a separate brokerage. If the split is disputed, it is usually because one side agreed — or believed they agreed — to share part of their commission with the other, and now that understanding is contested.
Commission disputes are fact-specific: who introduced whom, what was signed, what was paid.
If there is no Form I, the dispute comes down to:
- WhatsApp messages, if any exist
- Email threads, if any exist
- Any written confirmation, even informal
- Witness testimony from colleagues who were present
None of these are as clean as a signed form. WhatsApp messages help, but they are subject to interpretation. “Yeah 60/40 sounds good” reads differently three weeks later when the deal has closed and the numbers are real.
The single-commission structure
Some deals, particularly on rentals or smaller secondary transactions, see the commission paid by the client to one agency, with that agency then paying the co-broker their share. If several agents share work on one property, the total commission is split between them according to agreed roles from the start. When that agency delays or disputes the share, the co-broker has no direct claim on the client’s payment — only a claim against the receiving agency based on whatever agreement exists between them.
This is the scenario where agents wait the longest. The client has paid. The money is sitting in one brokerage’s account. The other brokerage is told “we are processing it” or “there’s a question about the split percentage” or simply nothing at all. The leverage is gone the moment the client pays without both parties already confirmed.
Off-plan: the developer pays, but who is the co-broker?
In Dubai’s off-plan market, the developer compensates the agent directly, allowing buyers to invest without incurring agency fees. This means an off-plan co-broker dispute is not about who receives money from the client — it is about which brokerage the developer pays, and whether there is a documented agreement between the two brokerages about sharing that payment.
RERA requires all commission agreements between developers and brokerages to be registered. This ensures transparency and protects both parties. A Dubai real estate brokerage cannot earn commission on a project without a registered agency agreement listing them as an authorised seller.
The friction point: if only one brokerage is registered as an authorised seller on that project, they receive the full developer commission. The co-broker who introduced the buyer has a claim only against that brokerage — not against the developer. If nothing was signed between the two agencies before the booking, the co-broker is relying entirely on goodwill.
Rental deals and Ejari
On rental transactions, the commission is typically paid by the tenant — the figure RERA recognises as customary and the one referenced when a commission dispute reaches the Rental Disputes Centre. When two agents co-broke a rental, the same principle applies: whatever the split, it needs to be agreed and documented before the tenancy contract is signed and the commission cheque is handed over.
Always write the agreed commission rate in the contract to prevent future misunderstandings or disputes. That principle applies equally to agent-to-agent agreements as it does to agent-to-client agreements.
Post-dated cheques — still the dominant payment instrument on many Dubai leases — add another layer of complexity. Once the tenant has issued cheques to one agency, those instruments do not split themselves. The internal co-broker payment becomes entirely dependent on one brokerage’s honesty and speed.
How disputes actually start: the four patterns
Understanding where the friction comes from helps you prevent it. Most co-broker disputes in Dubai trace back to one of four patterns.
Pattern 1: The split was agreed in passing, not in writing. The two agents spoke before the viewing. One said “we can do fifty-fifty.” The other heard it as provisional. The deal took four weeks. By closing, both agents have anchored on a number that serves their interests.
Pattern 2: The roles changed during the deal. The co-broker agreement was based on one agent doing the viewing and the other handling negotiation. Then the listing agent’s negotiator got involved. Then the buyer’s employer changed and the whole price had to be renegotiated. The original split, even if it was written down, referred to a deal that no longer exactly exists.
Pattern 3: The commission amount changed. A price reduction between MOU and transfer shifted the total commission figure. If the split was expressed as a percentage of the total, both agents’ numbers shifted. If it was expressed as a fixed dirham amount, who absorbs the reduction? No one agreed on that because no one thought about it at the time.
Pattern 4: One agency held the money and found a reason to delay. This is the least comfortable pattern to name, but it happens. One brokerage receives the full commission. The co-broker is owed their share. That share is not paid promptly. The reasons given are procedural: accounting is processing it, the manager needs to approve it, there is a question about VAT. Managing commission variables manually through spreadsheets or disconnected accounting tools creates chronic errors, agent disputes, and delayed payments. Sometimes the delay is genuine. Sometimes it is not. Either way, the co-broker is left chasing money they already earned.
What to do when you are already in the dispute
Step one: go back to everything written
Before you make any call, compile every piece of evidence. WhatsApp, email, voice notes, meeting notes. Reconstruct the timeline: when was the split mentioned, in what words, who was present, what happened immediately after. The goal is not to win an argument — it is to understand what you can actually prove.
Commission disputes are fact-specific: who introduced whom, what was signed, what was paid.
If you have anything in writing, even informal, that supports your position, you are not starting from zero. If you have nothing, you need to know that clearly before you escalate.
Step two: approach the other agency professionally
The broker-to-broker conversation is not a confrontation — it is a fact-finding exercise. You are not accusing anyone of lying. You are asking: what did your agent understand the split to be, based on what was discussed, and can we resolve the discrepancy now before it reaches the regulator?
Most disputes at this stage resolve. One side produces a WhatsApp thread that clarifies the number. The other side accepts it. The money moves. This is the best outcome: fast, no fees, relationship intact.
Step three: escalate to RERA / DLD if informal resolution fails
The Dubai Land Department regulates registered brokers and handles complaints about broker conduct — this is the route for misrepresentation or fee disputes with a brokerage. If you are a licensed agent with a legitimate claim, the regulatory route is available.
If a commission dispute arises, RERA’s Rental Disputes Settlement Centre handles the case. Having a written agreement is essential to win any dispute. Note that the RDSC’s primary jurisdiction is landlord-tenant disputes on tenancies. For broker-to-broker commission disputes on sales, the complaint route runs through DLD/RERA directly, not through the RDSC.
The process requires documentation. Only an agent holding an active RERA broker card, working under a brokerage with a valid Dubai trade licence, can lawfully collect commission, and the listing must carry a valid Trakheesi permit. If the other party’s paperwork is not in order, that becomes part of your complaint.
Step four: accept the cost of what was not set up
This is the part that stings, but it is honest. If there is no Form I and no written record of the split, you are in a weak position regardless of how clear your memory is. A compromise — not your ideal number, but something — is often the pragmatic outcome. Litigation or regulatory proceedings over a co-broker split are expensive in time, in money, and in relationships. Weigh the cost of the shortfall against the cost of the fight.
The more important investment is in making sure this does not happen on the next deal.
VAT and the tax invoice question
One practical area where disputes surface even between agents who agreed on the split: VAT.
On a resale or secondary-market purchase, the buyer conventionally pays 2% of the agreed sale price plus 5% VAT. The VAT element — 5% on the agency fee — must appear on a proper tax invoice issued by the licensed brokerage. When two brokerages split a commission, each side must account for VAT on their portion correctly. If the receiving brokerage issues the full tax invoice and then pays the co-broker their share without a corresponding invoice from the co-broker’s agency, there is a VAT compliance problem on both sides.
This is not a grey area agents should navigate informally. Each licensed brokerage involved in a co-brokered deal should issue its own tax invoice to the appropriate party for its own share of the commission. If the structure of the deal means one agency collects everything and then distributes, the paying agency needs a proper tax invoice from the co-broker’s agency to support that payment. Agreeing the split in writing, including the VAT treatment of each party’s share, is part of the pre-deal setup — not something to work out after the money arrives.
The standard of care that prevents this
The Dubai market runs heavily on speed. A buyer calls from overseas, wants to view three properties tomorrow, and if nothing suits, they are gone. In that environment, slowing down to paperwork can feel like losing the deal.
It is not. Before the buyer’s agent can arrange viewings, share the property’s details, or participate in negotiations, both agents must sign Form I. This protects the listing agent’s client relationship, ensures the buyer’s agent receives their agreed share of commission, and prevents disputes about who facilitated the sale.
Form I can be generated and signed digitally. The conversation that precedes it — “what’s our split?” — takes sixty seconds. The form takes another few minutes. There is no deal that moves so fast that this cannot happen before the first viewing. If the other agent will not commit to a written split before you bring your buyer through the door, that is information. Take note of it.
When an 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. It is important to ensure the form reflects everything discussed — property type, location, and price range — so that expectations are aligned from day one.
Beyond Form I on resales, the same discipline applies everywhere:
- Rental co-broking: Agree the split, confirm it in writing between the agencies, before the tenancy contract is signed and the commission cheque is produced.
- Off-plan co-broking: Confirm which brokerage is the registered authorised seller with the developer, and get a written inter-agency agreement on the share before the client’s booking deposit goes in.
- Referral arrangements: A referral from one agent to another is still a commission-sharing event. The terms — percentage, trigger event, timing of payment — need to be in writing before the referral is made.
The mechanism in each case is the same: documented agreement, signed by both sides, before the client pays. Not after. Not simultaneously. Before.
The moment of payment is the moment of maximum risk
Here is the dynamic that agents underestimate. The moment a client pays — whether it is a commission cheque on a rental, a buyer’s payment at the trustee office on a resale, or a developer disbursing commission on an off-plan booking — the leverage shifts completely. Before payment, both agencies need each other. After payment, one agency has the money and the other has a claim.
Claims require enforcement. Enforcement requires documentation. Documentation has to exist before the dispute, not be assembled after.
The way to make the payment moment low-risk is to have already resolved every question about who gets what before the client is asked to pay anything. The split is signed. The amounts are clear. The VAT treatment is agreed. When the money arrives, there is nothing to argue about, because the outcome was already determined by a document both sides signed weeks earlier.
That is not an idealistic standard. It is a professional one. It is also, in the end, the only arrangement that fully protects every agent involved — including the co-broker on the other side of the deal, who is equally exposed if nothing is written down.
When both agents are protected, the deal is protected
There is a version of the Dubai co-broker relationship that works well: two licensed agents, each with their client properly represented, a Form I in place before the first viewing, a clear split that both sides signed, and a deal that closes with everyone paid at the same time from the same transaction. No chasing. No phone calls three weeks later. No one “remembering it differently.”
That version is achievable on every deal. It requires thirty minutes of administrative discipline at the front end of the relationship, not a complicated system or a change in how Dubai real estate works.
The agents who run every co-broke this way are not slower than the ones who work on trust. They are faster — because their deals do not stall at the payment stage, they do not spend hours reconstructing conversations after closing, and they do not walk into the next deal carrying the weight of an unresolved dispute from the last one.
The principle is simple: the split is agreed in writing before anyone opens a door. Every party is paid at the same time, from the same transaction, in an amount they already signed for. When that is the standard, the conversation at the top of this article never happens.
