Comments on: Who Gets the Money?

By: Inti

Inti — Wed, 12 Nov 2008 02:10:34 +0000

Well, both are idiots. But what I wonder is how one spends Depression era banknotes (I guess she didn't just walk into the travel agency and pay her Hawaii trip with 1920s notes), and how much money they really were worth when adjusted for inflation.

By: noahstrickland

noahstrickland — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:53:42 +0000

who ever owns the house should get the money.

this only applies in the situation where the contractor was stupid enough to let the home owner know that he has found any money.

By: Christophe

Christophe — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 07:48:33 +0000

Mmm... Untaxable out-of-lawsuit liquid $60K went missing? How unfortunate!

“Earth provides enough to satisfy every man's need, but not every man's greed”
Mahatma Gandhi

By: SenorMysterioso

SenorMysterioso — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 05:37:16 +0000

She offered him 10% from the start, that is fair IMO but he wanted 40% so then the trouble started. She seems sort of shady because she says $60k was stolen from a shoe box but she did not report it to police. WTF?! If I'm missing one dollar I freak out.

By: Rocky Rook

Rocky Rook — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 02:58:04 +0000

That's fresh income. Pay taxes now.

By: DOJ

DOJ — Tue, 11 Nov 2008 00:11:12 +0000

I just want to know how to tax it.
Should the homeowner pay taxes now? Or more capital gains tax when she sells the house?

By: Sid Morrison

Sid Morrison — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:45:06 +0000

Yeah, this story made no sense to me at all. The only person owning this cash should be the current homeowner. If she so chose, she *could* give the contractor a reward for his honesty in not sneaking off with it, but she'd be under no obligation to do so. I can't imagine decendents of the guy who owned the place 70 years ago having any claim. If the homeowner didn't wind up with everything, she has a TERRIBLE lawyer.

By: just a guy

just a guy — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:24:45 +0000

@ Cap. He didn't forget, he died. His 'descendants' claim it as theirs. The contractor gets nothing, and has no right. Legally, the home owner should get it all. She owns the house, and everything within it. (Including things in the walls, like support beams, the electrical wires, hidden money or whatever). Morally, she might decided to give the money to the 'kids' of the guy who left it there. If it was some bauble that had only sentimental value, she probably would. But do the kids want it because its money or because 'that what he would of wanted'? Probably the former.

By: cb

cb — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 21:23:40 +0000

Ridiculous. It should be an open and closed case if the purchase contract is like 99.9% of home contracts.

By: Captain Great

Captain Great — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:36:59 +0000

What I really want to know is this: How can someone be so mindless and forgetful to be able to leave close to $200,000 hidden and move out of the house without remembering to retrieve it?

I say, tough sh*t, guys. If you are stupid enough to forget all about the money and leave it behind then the money is fair game to whomever finds it.

By: Bonwilsky

Bonwilsky — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 20:11:59 +0000

When we read this yesterday, my mother and I agreed that it would have been really hard for us to not seek out the original owners family. We would have been extremely curious as to why the cash had been hidden there. Also, how much worth did the individual bills have considering how rare they were?

By: Platfarmer

Platfarmer — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:44:09 +0000

I think that the contractor should have been offered a cut, seeing as how it him who discovered it, he should have demanded, he should have been offered, but seems both of the people involved were greedy, which is sad.

By: Ali S.

Ali S. — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:46:42 +0000

@ Chris

Exactly, what I was thinking...aren't they all crooks in the end?

*no offense to our readers who are contractors! :p

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:42:50 +0000

Well obviously the contractor has no claim on the money. I wonder why he didn't just steal it.

By: Miranda

Miranda — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:33:41 +0000

First of all, why did the contractor feel that he had the right to go looking at what it was. I mean if they were using your bathroom and they saw a box in the cabinet or behind the toilet or something, they don't have the right to look at it. And, you think the old guy who put it there would have remembered that.. I mean I think that is something you'd remember.. They were both idiots and for that they should get nothing. If they would have figured out where it came from they might have gotten some money out of it anyways..

By: Idil

Idil — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 18:06:44 +0000

Of course the descendents should get it! What would the guy who put it there prefer; for strangers to get it or his descendents? These people are very selfish.

By: MENLOHEAVYWEIGHT

MENLOHEAVYWEIGHT — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:09:23 +0000

So we are all in agreement that the contractor gets nothing, and we agree that the decendents get nothing, but what I am wondering is how do you spend $14,000 on a vaction to Hawaii, I just went to Italy from California and I only spent $10,000, and I was vacationing in what I thought lavish means, and right now the exchange rate is horrible.

By: Martini

Martini — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:53:10 +0000

In Canada, ANYTHING left in the house once ownership passes to the buyer becomes property of the new owner. It's TS for the previous owner and obviously the idiot contractor!

By: K!P

K!P — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:35:32 +0000

if the contracter finds mold, he does not lay claim to the ownership, so he can't have anny money he finds.

By: cheechman85

cheechman85 — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:19:49 +0000

I agree, contractor should get absolutely no money. But, who knows how much he actually got. The details were never made public.

By: renderanything

renderanything — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:13:59 +0000

I saw this one recently too. The writer of the story I read pointed out that if they could have agreed on a split, then no court would have been involved.

By: LisaL

LisaL — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:57:42 +0000

Just shows you how greedy people can get over money.
I don't see how the contractor thought they had any right to the money.
Or how the previous owner thinks they do either.
New homeowner owns everything that house contains once they bought the house... no ifs ands or buts.

By: Miss Cellania

Miss Cellania — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:45:39 +0000

Yeah, I'm not done exploring my new old house yet, but so far all the "treasures" will be going to the scrap metal dealer.

By: andiscandis

andiscandis — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:37:12 +0000

Ditto. If the cash is hidden in the wall and I buy the house, the cash is MINE!!! I bought an old home just hoping to find hidden treasure, but it looks like this house's inhabitants have been poor through the ages.

By: SenorMysterioso

SenorMysterioso — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:26:42 +0000

I agree, the contractor has zero claim on this money. I found a big screen television in your basement while I was putting up drywall, think I'll keep it.

By: gmuller

gmuller — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:14:35 +0000

Saw this on the news actually, seems pretty ridiculous that the contractor would have any claim to the money at all. The homeowner owns the home and all that it contains, even if she didn't know all of the things that it contained.

By: krango

krango — Mon, 10 Nov 2008 15:05:11 +0000

Looks like the only legal precedent here is the historic case of Finders vs. Keepers...