Lease is signed. What do I owe the broker?

my mistake, this should be moved to rentals

I hate to say, but it's enough money that the broker may sue and then it will likely cost more than paying the fee. I would tell the landlord you are going to walk because of this BS and use that as leverage to either reduce or remove the broker fee. And if the landlord says fine, then just walk.

Or if the deal is that good that it's worth the fee, then pay it. Just be careful it is rent stabilized at the amount of the lease and not a 'preferential rent', which has no value to you after the first lease period.

I'm not sure that I agree. Although the owner can make it a pre-condition on renting the unit that you pay the broker (i.e. protecting the broker) they do not have to do so. As long as you personally did not agree to pay or work with the broker or sign anything indicating same, you should not be liable. Having the right to choose who to work with is a fundamental right. On the other hand, if you have verbal recognition or promises to the broker that you are working with them it gets a little more complicated. It would depend on the facts, I would think. You should also take into account that if you try to go around the Broker you will be living next to someone who is really pissed off at you. If it were me, I would try talking to the Broker first and tell them the situation, that you feel they are not entitled to a fee as you did not engage their services, and that you will pay them 1 mo fee to settle the matter. This balances both sides.

No signed brokers agreement, nothing in the lease saying you have to pay. You owe the broker nothing. Contracts 101.

ah, you say exact brokers fee not mentioned. What does it say?

pier45, are you on drugs?

The OP should walk from a rent stabilized apartment?
The lawsuit will cost more than the fee? (also keep in mind, this is a broker with nothing behind him whatsoever)
The lease governs your relationship between you and the broker. The agreement you have between you and the broker governs, and an oral agreement will apply. The broker probably has a leg to stand on if he was the listing agent for the property and especially if he did the paperwork, but would have to go after you and has a weak case in absence of a written agreement between you and in absence of being listed in the lease. And then would have to prove that 15% is the market reasonable rate, which itself is of more than significant question. You have a strong hand in the negotiations, but you shouldn't expect to get away with nothing. Offer a very modest amount and provide justification per the above. No, do not settle on 1 month, I would be enough of a betting man to suggest that no court of law would award more than 1 month, so why start anywhere near that? Offer $500 and remind the broker how little he did. Go up to $650 next then stop returning emails. Also, just to clarify, I'm assuming this is in New York, not C0lumbia C0unty, and that your broker isn't Jim_Hores.

Also, stop being so sloppy, otherwise this becomes your issue eventually. The bank misspelled the checks? That's your fault for either filling out the forms wrong, or for not checking the checks which is what normal people do when getting something from the bank.

Ok I misread the OP and thought the broker had handled the paperwork. If the LL went around them I agree they have nothing to stand on.

Although we need more information (ie, any information disclosed by the landlord that any prospective tenant NEEDS to use this broker of his, verbal or written), it would seem, by all accounts, that the OP does NOT owe this crook ANYTHING. Seems like he wasn't even AROUND at all to make any agreements, verbal, written, implied or expressed. You have no relationship with this broker, as it stands now (at least, from the information we have in the OP). I wouldn't offer a dime. Will he threaten to sue? Maybe. Will he sue? There's a chance. Would he win? Very unlikely.

jamiroking- did the LL expressly communicate to you that you needed to work with and pay this missing-in-action broker?

Thanks for all the posts guys.

I admit that I should have checked the checks. That was my fault.

To clarify, my friend told me the broker's number and said contacting the landlord would just annoy him and that's why he goes through this broker guy. I then had to wait for him to get back in the country, at which time I had all my paperwork ready for him.

We then met at the apartment with the LL who told me the basics (eg heating, roof access, etc). At this point he mentinoed in an aside that the broker was the only agent for the building. At this point, because the apartment was still under renovations, the landlord agreed to start the lease on feb 1 and when the apartment was ready, I could cut him a check for the pro-rated January and move in. The broker then said "it'll require the first month's rent, the 1 month security, and my thing". No fee or specific percentage was mentioned until later when he sent a "funds breakdown email" detailing the above and a 15% fee.

At this point I called him and told him this was really high for what he did but he wouldn't budge saying he could just wait and rent it to someone who would pay the 15%. I then tried to get him to get a 2 year lease to lock in the $2400 rate which was turned town by the landlord. The next day, I met with the Broker at his apt to sign the lease. The only mention of the broker in the whole thing is a line detailing fees to be paid at the signing of a lease: "first month's rent, 1 month security and if a broker was used, any broker fees"

Can someone elaborate on how to find out about this "preferential rent" stabilization?

thanks

Since I brought it up I'll explain. Whether it is preferential is clearly labeled on the front page of your rent stabilized lease. It will say how much the stabilized rent is and if there is a preferential discount.

The reason this is important is to compare the value of what you are getting. If it is a free market apartment with a one year lease and $2,400 rent, then paying a 15% fee means you are effectively paying $2,760. This is because the landlord can raise the rent however much they want after the first year. So you compare it against other no-fee places charging $2,760.

If it's a rent-stabilized place and stabilized at 2,400, by signing the lease you are getting real value in the future because of the limited rent increases and protections of this kind of lease. So paying the fee is essentially buying you this right. But if the rent stabilized amount is $3,000, and reduced preferentially to $2,400, then the landlord can kick you out after the first year by raising it to the full $3,000.

As many others have noted if you get the fee down from 15% adjust all the numbers above.

I am a broker and I didn't pay a commission to anyone (including the 'resident' broker) of the apartment I lease. I was living in a neighboring apartment and I contacted the LL directly. Long story short there was no agitation or case by the usual listing agent.

Ask the broker to produce their exclusive listing agreement in effect for the property at the time of the lease, and if they do so inform them the landlord acted outside of their agreement, but you are not a party to said agreements.

Contract = buyer / seller / price / date / term. A third party's ratification is not a contingency unless otherwise stated. I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice.

David Rosen, Douglas Elliman

Your building doesn't apply for the preferential rent of rent stabilization. Pier45 seems to want to distract you.

By the way, are you of any "protected status". Quickest way to knock aside this broker is to point out how he's discriminating against you according to fair housing laws by singling you out for the fee or denying you the apartment which the landlord says you are qualified for.