The plaintiff stated in his affidavit of his main testimony that the property was published immediately within 24 hours of the signing of the exclusivity agreement and the form ordering the brokerage services (the plaintiff attached to the affidavit examples of the publications he made on the website of Class Real Estate, Yad 2, Madeleine), and that in addition, he proactively approached customers from his client base (see also paragraph 3 of the defendant's affidavit of the main testimony, which confirms that already at the time of signing the agreement, it was said that the plaintiff would present the property to three clients).
The defendants claim in the summaries that there is no evidence in the attached publications that the publications were made close to the signing of the brokerage agreement. According to them, there is an advertisement in the Globes newspaper from July 2023, and regarding all the other publications, there is no indication of when they were published.
The plaintiff was questioned on this matter in his cross-examination, and replied (p. 19 of the transcript):
"Adv. Rosenwasser: I've looked at the publications you attached and I'm trying to figure out what date they were, there is no mention of a date except for August '23 which is the date they were probably printed from the computer, what is your answer to that?
The witness, Mr. Baruch: ... My answer is that when I start marketing a property, I'm happy, not on the same day I start marketing, I start taking screenshots of the publication date because I don't start thinking about what happens tomorrow if someone can and tries to work on me and I have to prove it."
The plaintiff's testimony that immediately after signing the agreements with the defendants he began marketing the property, was not concealed. The explanation he gave that there was no indication of the date of publication in the publications he presented is acceptable to me.
It should also be noted that the defendants' claim that the buyer contacted the defendant on February 16, 2023, before marketing activities were carried out, came up for the first time in the summaries, after the defendant was asked in a cross-examination regarding the date of the beginning of the relationship with the buyers. In any event, the buyer was not brought to testify, and therefore the possibility that she contacted the defendant following the plaintiff's publications was not ruled out, and the presumption that the plaintiff was the effective factor in the engagement was not contradicted.