Contractor, Homeowner Feud Over Money in Walls

Who should get the money?

  • Previous Homeowner - P. Dunne's family

    Votes: 20 16.0%
  • Current Homeowner - 100%

    Votes: 65 52.0%
  • Contractor - 100%

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Homeowner 50% Contractor 50%

    Votes: 10 8.0%
  • Homeowner 90% Contractor 10%

    Votes: 27 21.6%
  • Other

    Votes: 3 2.4%

  • Total voters
    125

Taximom

Former Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2005
Messages
16,234
Reaction score
136
Contractor, Homeowner Feud Over Depression-Era Currency Found Hidden Behind Bathroom Walls
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/12/12/ap/strange/main3613058.shtml

The fight began in May 2006 when Kitts was gutting Reece's bathroom and found a box below the medicine cabinet that contained $25,200.

"I almost passed out," Kitts recalled. "It was the ultimate contractor fantasy."

He called Reece, who rushed home. Together they found another steel box tied to the end of a wire nailed to a stud. Inside was more than $100,000, Kitts said. Two more boxes were filled with a mix of money and religious memorabilia.

"It was insane," Kitts said. "She was in shock _ she was a wreck."

The bundles had "P. Dunne" written on them, a likely reference to Peter Dunne, a businessman who owned the home during the Depression. (more at link)
 
Gosh it just seems it would belong to the homeowner.
I am going to pay more attention during my remodel.:D

ETA: I picked the 90-10 option..but I think that would just be nice of the HO to give a portion to the contractor.
 
I agree the money belongs to the Current owner.

If the money had been found in a common area or on community property then I would say the contractor.
I think Reece was more then generous to offer a 10% finders fee.
I don't even think she had to offer that.
 
Gosh it just seems it would belong to the homeowner.
I am going to pay more attention during my remodel.:D

ETA: I picked the 90-10 option..but I think that would just be nice of the HO to give a portion to the contractor.
ita with ya bean
 
The contractor was honest about it. Wow. After watching my family get homes built over the years, I sort of thought contractors were all gnarly theives.

Honestly, I think the person who the money belongs to owns it. If he's dead, the family should get it.
 
Gosh it just seems it would belong to the homeowner.
I am going to pay more attention during my remodel.:D

ETA: I picked the 90-10 option..but I think that would just be nice of the HO to give a portion to the contractor.
I agree it would be nice...however I think the homeowner is the rightful owner of the money.
 
I voted that the homeowner should get it all, but should definitely consider the honesty of the contractor and pay him something beyond what he was going to make on the job.

They both better hope P. Dunne's family doesn't hear about their feud!
 
I agree it would be nice...however I think the homeowner is the rightful owner of the money.

I do think it's interesting we ALL have morals at what should be done, but they aren't all the same. No wonder our kids fight over finders keepers and the teachers have a difficult time settling things. :)


I do want to add that while I THINK the money belongs to the family of the guy who stashed it away - that doesn't mean I'd actually give it to them unless they were destitute. I might though. Some people hold their family history close to their heart and it would devistate them that they weren't informed of this situation. If I were in the situation, I can't say I'd do the right thing. Just that I know what I think the right thing is. :)
 
I say the home owner, but it would be kind and right to give the 10% to the contractor.

To my thinking anyone dumb enough to forget that kind of money loses out,:doh: the house is sold "as is" and the money was part of the "is"
 
I would think that it legally belongs to the current owner of the house. He could give the contractor a reward for finding it. What if the contractor found a lost or misplaced wedding ring while remodeling, would he want to keep that, too?
 
Well, Reece did offer Kitts 10% and he rejected it. Personally, I would have taken it, especially if an appraiser valued the find at $500000. 50k + original fee for remodeling a bathroom isn't a bad payday at all.

Edit: Just wanted to add, it's interesting and sad to see how fast money can come in between friends (I believe the article said they were friends since highschool).
 
http://www.cleveland.com/news/plain...yahoga/1197452108280821.xml&coll=2&thispage=3

Ohio and most other states have no specific statute governing what happens when someone finds a once-hidden treasure, so common-law principles dating to pre-Revolutionary Great Britain come into play, said Cleveland-Marshall's Robertson.

That common law has a fairly definitive "finders-keepers" bent to it.

That's true even when the finding is done on someone else's property, as long as the finder had permission to be there, courts have established.

That doesn't mean Kitts is clearly the winner. Unless the two sides settle, a judge or jury will need to decide whether he found money that was, in a legal sense, "lost" or "mislaid," Robertson and other lawyers say.

Kitts asserts he found lost money, and court rulings in Ohio establish that treasure trove's "finders keepers" law does indeed apply to something that was lost, if there's no reason to believe any owner will reappear to claim it.

But if it was absentmindedly mislaid on private property rather than lost, the owner of the property on which the discovery was made becomes the safekeeper of the lost goods, according to case law and legal texts.

In either case, the holder must make a good-faith effort to find the original owner or heirs before cashing in.
 
If they were friends since high school, that would make it 50/50 in my book. Friends are priceless and you don't fight over money with them.
 
If they were friends since high school, that would make it 50/50 in my book. Friends are priceless and you don't fight over money with them.

Maybe I misspoke. The article said highschool classmates. I assumed they were friends.
 
In the article I quoted above she complains that he did some extra-curricular remodeling without permission looking for more money in her home.
 
You were popular in high school, I assume. :)

I wasn't popular in my opinion.

I was a band geek and one of those kids who had 2 or 3 really good friends and surfed in between all of the various cliques/friend groups. So I had a ton of acquaintances. It was nice walking from one class to the other and have about 20 people say hi to you.

It also helps having a good sense of humor. :D
 
This is definitely the homeowner. If they had found termites, they would be his.
 
This is definitely the homeowner. If they had found termites, they would be his.

I'm with you. This wasn't "lost" property, more like abandoned or misplaced. She hired him to do the work in her home. He wasn't there treasurer hunting, but as a paid employee remodeling. There was a case where a guy found gold using a metal detector while trespassing ... even tho it was lost property and he found it, the courts ruled that it was to go to the property owner otherwise it would encourage the illegal trespassing for people looking for buried treasure.
 
I think the decent thing to do would be to split it 50/50. The homeowner wouldn't have found the money without him doing the work and the contractor certainly could have kept his mouth shut and kept it all for himself. I don't know what the legal precedent would be but I think they should do anyway.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
180
Guests online
3,926
Total visitors
4,106

Forum statistics

Threads
591,827
Messages
17,959,683
Members
228,621
Latest member
MaryEllen77
Back
Top