After first seeing your post earlier today, Lenny, and the initial threads explaining your options, I decided to pass on answering as didn't feel anything more need be added. But as it has gotten increasingly interesting with your follow up, please allow me to add something. Not being a lawyer, I cannot tell you exactly what procuring cause would likely be in your particular situation. I can, however, tell you what a legal definition might be, as interpreted by a judge in a civil case, based on the following:
â€œIn the context of a real estate transaction, procuring cause refers to actions that begin or set in motion a serious of events that lead to the final sale of a property. Under some state laws, which vary by state, a real estate broker may be entitled to a commission as a procuring cause of a sale if the broker brought the purchaser and seller together and brought about a sale through continuous negotiations initiated by him, unless the seller and buyer intentionally exclude the broker.
Typically, for the broker to be entitled to the commission, it must bring together the seller and purchaser, and not just a person associated with the seller or purchaser. The broker must often be involved in the negotiations between the buyer and seller to be entitled to a commission. The mere act of informing a potential purchaser, who eventually purchases the property, about a prospective purchase may not be enough for the broker to be a procuring cause in the sale. The precise definition depends on state law and the facts and circumstances in each case.â€
If, as you earlier wrote, the former agent showed you the property AND submitted an offer which was not accepted, then based on the definition above, he might well be entitled to a commission, particularly if you and he signed a BBA. Since you are this irate, my question would be, is the previous agent just as mad? If so, and you follow through with the eventual purchase of the property in question, it may well take an arbitrator to settle this.