Did my RE attorney screw me on this deal?

[Jacob Chaney]

I had a 6 unit apartment building under contract in Washington, DC that requires that tenants be given the first right to purchase (referred to locally as TOPA).

The seller contacted me 3 weeks prior to close and said that he still had two tenants that had signed statements to vacate but were still residing in the property. He was concerned that merely having a signed purchase contract without offering them the right to purchase would put him in violation of the law and open him to civil/criminal penalties. He suggested I release him from the contract and then once they moved out on the agreed upon date and the property was 100% vacant we would sign another contract. This sounded reasonable and I asked my RE attorney to draw up a release.

Once the tenants moved out and the time to re-sign the PA came around the seller informs me "I'm sorry, I have another for $250k more, all cash". I found out later that this purchase was made by my competitor.

Should my attorney have placed language in the release in order to protect me from something like this happening? I thought that's what I was paying him for. I hired him to look out for my interest.

I have no desire to take any legal action but now this same attorney is claiming that I still owe them $1800 in fees from this deal I believe they had a hand in sinking.

Advice? Thoughts?