http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j3pn0mwiLlPosC6LcTQaXvQV8BaQD8TG6TI00
A contractor who helped discover bundles of Depression-era U.S. currency totaling $182,000 hidden behind bathroom walls said the homeowner should turn the money over to him or at least share it. Kitts asserts he found lost money, and court rulings in Ohio establish that a "finders keepers" law applies if there's no reason to believe any owner will reappear to claim it.
Do you think she should share the money if so why if no why?
2007-12-14 04:18:30 · 9 answers · asked by Bishop Rashad 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
I assume the contractor was being paid by the owner to do work on the property. The property and everything on the property belonged to the owner. To me, it would be like if a contractor hired to build an addition found gold while digging the foundation. He couldn't stake a claim to the gold deposit, it would belong to the property owner.
2007-12-14 05:20:00 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I have been thinking about that article today and I have to put myself in the position of the home owner. I am paying someone to repair my home, and what he sees or finds in MY home is my property, so therefore I believe that the owner should keep the money. I do realize that had he not found it, no one might have, but had she not needed a contractor, he would not have either. Maybe she could give him a "finders fee" or something considering that they are saying it may be worth $500,000 now!
2007-12-14 04:23:36 · answer #2 · answered by Lisa T (Stop BSL) 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The key for me is the word contractor, this person was working for and in someones private residence. I believe the money is totally the homeowners. I also would give the contractor some, I would have gave probably 20%. I guess I'd start subtracting out lawyers fees now.
2007-12-14 04:30:28 · answer #3 · answered by Denny B 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"Finders Keepers" only applies if the find is not in the primary residence of a homeowner.
In this case, the owner's private property rights (and the fact that the contractor was hired to be on her property) trump the Finders Keepers law.
If it were me, I'd share, but it isn't my call.
2007-12-14 04:24:07 · answer #4 · answered by Jim P 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
when you buy a house you are actually buying the land and you get anything that sits on it, that is why such documents are recorded in the town or county "LAND RECORDS". The owner of the house owns that money, but it would definitely be the right thing to do to share the money with the contractor since he was the one that found it for him. Flip the guy a couple of grand! Its Christmas! :)
2007-12-14 04:24:01 · answer #5 · answered by mcbarbeau 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sounds like a troll question. You assumed the owners put the condoms in the filtration unit, when some sneak in the neighborhood could have put those in the unit as a joke on you. They could have turned that box over to the postal authorities who would have then investigate you. If you have a mortgage on this property, what do you think the mortgage holders will do after they find this out ?
2016-05-23 22:50:07 · answer #6 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Finders keepers does not apply on private property. He is a paid employee and has no rights to anything he "finds" unless the owner gives something to him.
2007-12-14 04:30:34 · answer #7 · answered by sensible_man 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Its the homeowners and not the contractors but I would share it ot would have. Since the contractor is throwing a fit I would probably not give him anything.
2007-12-14 05:00:04 · answer #8 · answered by Slick 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I fit were me, On top of paying my bill I would defintely give him a finder's bonus. This is one of those times that if they had sat down and discussed it like rational adults are supposed to do then there would be no need for the court to get involved.
2007-12-14 04:26:54 · answer #9 · answered by christina h 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋