Many sellers are still unaware that changing their agent or working with multiple agents without clear guidelines could risk having to pay double commission upon the sale of the property.
Recent court rulings such as City and Atlantic Real Estate CC t/a Remax Living v Smith and Others (December 2024/2025), continue to highlight that when multiple agents are involved, disputes over who introduced the buyer first (the "effective cause") can result in costly litigation.
This financial trap usually springs from the legal concept of "effective cause," which determines which agent’s efforts actually triggered the sale. In South African law, the agent who signs the final offer is not always the one entitled to the commission. If a previous agent introduced the buyer to the property first and that introduction is deemed the primary reason for the sale, that agent may have a valid legal claim to their full professional fee, even if another agent closed the deal later.
Mitigating Against the Risk of Double Commission
Sellers often mistakenly think that using multiple agents will get the property sold faster or achieve a higher price. While there are always exceptions, it is seldom the case in reality. Rather, the risk of double commission is most acute when sellers opt for an "open mandate" involving several agencies without clear guidelines as to how the commission will be split.
High-profile court cases, such as Wakefields Real Estate v Attree, have seen the Supreme Court of Appeal set the rule that sellers were liable for two full commissions because they allowed different agents to deal with the same buyer. The court essentially found that the sellers created their own misfortune by not managing the introductions properly, leaving them with a massive and unexpected legal bill.
Relying on multiple agents also tends to work against the seller’s best interests. The effect may either be that the primary goal becomes getting any offer signed as quickly as possible which may not deliver the best price for the seller. It could also delay the sale as agents would likely rather work on their Sole Mandate properties, which offer guaranteed commission on a successful sale.
Minimising Double Commission Risks when Switching Agents
When sellers decide to appoint another agent, they must be mindful of the potential risks of double commission which could arise where a buyer was introduced by the previous agent.
To mitigate these risks, the seller must always demand a written "protected list" from the outgoing agent which includes the names of every person who viewed the property during their tenure. This list must be handed to the new agent to ensure there is a paper trail to guard against overlapping claims.
The Best Solution is a Seeff Sole Mandate, It Delivers Successful Sales
Ultimately, the best way to avoid these headaches is to appoint a single, reputable local expert from the start. A Seeff Sole Mandate provides the legal framework to ensure you only ever pay one commission while benefiting from a higher level of service and marketing investment. On average, Seeff’s Sole Mandate properties sell faster and achieve higher prices compared to the market averages.
By working exclusively with a specialist who understands the nuances of the local market, sellers can protect their profit and ensure a much smoother transition from "for sale" to "sold."