A contractor who found $182,000 in Depression-era currency hidden in a bathroom wall has ended up with only a few thousand dollars, but he feels some vindication.Basically, the contractor is hired for a job and while busting up her walls, finds two boxes with $182,000 inside. But then it gets weird.
The windfall discovery amounted to little more than grief for contractor Bob Kitts, who couldn't agree on how to split the money with homeowner Amanda Reece.I can't figure out why he would think he should get any of the money. She owns the house so the money is hers.
But how to share? She offered 10 percent. He wanted 40 percent. From there things went sour.She generously offered him $18,200 but he wanted four times as much? What the heck? There must be more to this story because none of it was rightly his. Of course, during their quibbling, the descendants of the guy who left the money in the wall 80 years ago found out about it and now also had to be cut into the deal. Very weird.
And, to top it off, he thinks he did the right thing.
He's often asked why he didn't keep his mouth shut and pocket the money. He says he wasn't raised that way.Had I been in that situation, there would be no question that all of the money would go to the woman who owned the house. I can't see how I would be entitled to a single penny.
I guess I was just raised that way.
4 comments:
This whole thing is more complicated than the article makes it out to be. Since the money was deliberately hidden by the original owner (Patrick Dunne), who is now deceased, it could legally be considered treasure trove, in which case, under American common law, it belongs to the finder, unless the original owner reclaims it. It also appears that when the money was first discovered, the property owner (the property in question was not her residence) and the contractor made an agreement with each other to split the money. The property owner later reneged on that agreement. The contractor claimed this was a breach of a verbal contract.
Had things gone the way they were supposed to, the money would have been divided among Dunne’s heirs after he died. So, they could be considered the rightful owners, reclaiming their property.
I figured it was more complicated. I'm not sure I understand how something found in one's house (residence or not) could be considered treasure trove, but that's nothing I've ever studied.
The article simplifies and thus makes this guy look like a douchebag. Of course, even if he had a legal right to claim some of it, I still think he should have just let the owner have it.
...or just taken it and not said a word. Problem solved.
What? I'm just sayin'.
She supposedly offered him $18,200 as a reward. I think that was incredibly generous.
Post a Comment