Rich people's troubles: An American Jewish millionaire bought an apartment in a Tel Aviv tower for 84 million shekels, but did not pay the brokerage fee to the realtor with whom the contract was signed by his daughter. The realtor sued him for NIS 1,965,600. On Thursday, Judge Abiem Barkai ruled that the broker deserves only half the sum because he presented only half the floor. Therefore, the brokerage fee to which the plaintiff is entitled is NIS 982,800 plus NIS <>,<> in court costs and legal fees.
According to the lawsuit, the millionaire's house signed a brokerage agreement that related, among other things, to the 28th floor of a building on Arlozorov Street in Tel Aviv. For half the floor, the sum of NIS 65,000,000 was required, with the realtor presenting the property at shell level, and later the realtor remained in contact with the family, especially the millionaire's wife, while offering and presenting them with other properties – whether for purchase or rent. After a while, he received a message that they were no longer looking for a property and, as she put it, "Thank You we are not looking anymore."
Arlozorov 17 (archive), photo: Moshe Tzur
In fact, it turned out that the couple had toured with a new realtor who introduced them to purchase the same property. They made an offer to purchase, which was not accepted. At the end of the day, they decided to purchase the entire 28th floor for 84 million shekels. The plaintiff was in contact with them and even knew that they had purchased a property but did not know that it was a property that he claimed was presented by him. After the plaintiff learned from media reports about the property that had been purchased, he demanded payment of brokerage fees, which they refused.
The judge accepted only part of the lawsuit. In his ruling, he noted that Malkila tried to evade payment. "The defendants were so determined to evade payment and deny the existence of a brokerage agreement that even in the statement of defense they did not hesitate to deny the existence of a binding agreement," wrote Justice Barkai, adding: "The defendants' evasive attempts ceased when it came to filing their affidavits. Their version has also changed. This time, the defendants have already admitted unequivocally that they acted together."
In summary, the judge ruled that a clear picture emerged that the mediator had indeed sent and signed a binding brokerage agreement with the defendants. In addition, he noted that although the actual signature of their daughter was only, the affidavits indicate that the signature was also in their name and for them.
"There is no dispute that at the end of the day, the couple purchased the entire 28th floor of the residence, including the half floor that was first presented to them by the plaintiff," stressing that the realtor is entitled to the brokerage fee. "We cannot accept a situation in which the defendants excluded the plaintiff from the transaction and even compartmentalized him. Nothing was said to the plaintiff about any other transaction they were interested in, a transaction that was none other than a unit purchase deal presented to her by the plaintiff," the judge concluded.
Wrong? We'll fix it! If you find a mistake in the article, please share with us