Thousands of pounds found in Spalding waterway

[cronus]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-li ... e-25008898

Thousands of pounds found in Spalding waterway

Around sixty thousand pounds in banknotes have been found floating in a Lincolnshire waterway.

A dog walker spotted the notes in the South Drove Drain in Spalding.

Officers said a large number of the notes were damaged but "a good quantity" appeared to be in reasonable condition.

The force is considering carrying out a detailed forensic examination of the money in an attempt to trace where it came from.

(continued, thinking about fishing as a hobby...today.)

[klr]

"Money for nothing, and your fish for free ..."

[cronus]

It looks like a river bank robbery to me.

[JimC]

Talk about cash flow issues...

[Tero]

If it goes to the state, it's all the same as if never found.

Anyone's mattress found?

[Seth]

If it goes to the state, it's all the same as if never found.

Anyone's mattress found?

Idiot sheeple. Shoot, shovel, and shut up. Learn it, use it.

Over in Boulder County, Colorado a few years ago two kids, about age 9, found an old gym bag that had been sitting in an open field next to a road (N. 76th St. to be exact) for, according to residents, a couple of YEARS. They curiously opened it and found some $86,000 in cash. They turned it over to their parents, who turned it over to the county Sheriff. Now at the time Colorado's found property law required that anyone who finds anything over $50 in value is supposed to REPORT it to the local county court clerk, who is required to publish the find and attempt to identify the true owner. However, the law did not require the SURRENDER of the found items to the court (much less the Sheriff) it allowed the finder to hold onto it for a statutory period (I think it was 90 days) and if the court clerk could not find the true owner, it was "finder's keepers, loser's weepers."

The Sheriff's department "investigated" and tried to find an owner to claim the money for some six months, and in the end no one claimed it. But, when the parents went to the Sheriff and demanded the money, the Sheriff refused to release it, saying that they had "probable cause" to believe it was proceeds from a drug transaction so they were going to seize it under asset forfeiture laws and use it to buy goodies for the department rather than giving it back to the kids who found it.

There was an enormous public hue and cry over this, and eventually the Sheriff, after taking a real hammering in the press, relented and gave the money to the kids, whose parents deposited it in college funds for each.

The County Commissioners tried to enact a "lost property" law that would claim all title to lost items, but in the end settled for a formalized process of the Sheriff safe-keeping the item and trying to find the true owner for a statutory period, but the finder still gets it back if it's not claimed.

Many states just lay claim to lost property and if you find something you are required to give it to the state, including archeological artifacts on private land, which can then sell it or use it without compensating the finder...which is just wrong.

I wonder what the case is in Great Britain. I know that they have a "treasure trove" law that covers historical artifacts and treasure found on private lands that vests title in the state, but does offer the finder at least some compensation. I consider that to be unconscionable however, because despite the historical value of an artifact, private property is private, and when you buy it you gain title to everything on and under it and the state should have to negotiate to buy artifacts just like anybody else. I might go for a right of first refusal that allows the state to take possession of the article at whatever price the owner is offered for it on the open market, but even that's iffy. At least that has the benefit of allowing the owner to maximize his return by finding a willing buyer that will pay what he's willing to accept, with the proviso that the state can step in and acquire the piece at that price. That's fair to the owner at least.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Treasure trove almost always results in the state disposing of the items (usually donating them to a museum) and an amount equal to their market value being divided equally between the finder, the land-owner and anyone else deemed a participant in the discovery. This is in order to prevent the loss of potentially historic articles to filthy, grubby-handed, foreign collectors.

Treasure trove only applies to items over a certain age, so wouldn't have applied in this case.

[Audley Strange]

Never volunteer information to the Establishment. If I found 60k floating down stream the last people I'd call would be the cops. Like calling in priests when the local kids go skinny dipping, its always a bad idea to get them involved unless necessary.

[mistermack]

Treasure trove almost always results in the state disposing of the items (usually donating them to a museum) and an amount equal to their market value being divided equally between the finder, the land-owner and anyone else deemed a participant in the discovery. This is in order to prevent the loss of potentially historic articles to filthy, grubby-handed, foreign collectors.

Treasure trove only applies to items over a certain age, so wouldn't have applied in this case.

That's what's supposed to happen, but in practice, the sum is never anywhere near the real market value.
I don't know how they get away with bending the law so much, but they do.
They generally manage to engineer a completely false valuation.

[Seth]

Treasure trove almost always results in the state disposing of the items (usually donating them to a museum) and an amount equal to their market value being divided equally between the finder, the land-owner and anyone else deemed a participant in the discovery. This is in order to prevent the loss of potentially historic articles to filthy, grubby-handed, foreign collectors.

Treasure trove only applies to items over a certain age, so wouldn't have applied in this case.

That's what's supposed to happen, but in practice, the sum is never anywhere near the real market value.
I don't know how they get away with bending the law so much, but they do.
They generally manage to engineer a completely false valuation.

That's why I favor the "right of first refusal" method. That way if the finder does not choose to sell the object, he gets to keep it and enjoy it for as long as he likes, it being his property. But if he does decide to sell it, he finds a buyer and agrees on a price but must then submit the offer to the state and the state then has a short statutory period (like 10 days) to either step into the shoes of the buyer and pay that negotiated price or decline to purchase the item, in which case the buyer becomes the new owner. Such a law can also make that right of first refusal perpetual so that any time the property changes hands by sale the government has a new opportunity to acquire it at the market price.

[Seth]

Never volunteer information to the Establishment. If I found 60k floating down stream the last people I'd call would be the cops. Like calling in priests when the local kids go skinny dipping, its always a bad idea to get them involved unless necessary.

Just be sure to report it on your income taxes as a "windfall profit" and pay the taxes due. That's usually how people get in trouble over gambling winnings.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Never volunteer information to the Establishment. If I found 60k floating down stream the last people I'd call would be the cops. Like calling in priests when the local kids go skinny dipping, its always a bad idea to get them involved unless necessary.

Just be sure to report it on your income taxes as a "windfall profit" and pay the taxes due. That's usually how people get in trouble over gambling winnings.

In our poor, benighted, socialist hell, there is no tax on gambling winnings.

[Seth]

I just read that if the true owner of the money can't be found the money will go to the government under a "court forfeiture action," and the finder will get jack and squat.

[Seth]

Never volunteer information to the Establishment. If I found 60k floating down stream the last people I'd call would be the cops. Like calling in priests when the local kids go skinny dipping, its always a bad idea to get them involved unless necessary.

Just be sure to report it on your income taxes as a "windfall profit" and pay the taxes due. That's usually how people get in trouble over gambling winnings.

In our poor, benighted, socialist hell, there is no tax on gambling winnings.

Somehow I doubt that. It may not be levied directly on winnings like it is here, but I'll bet my bottom dollar that it gets taxed somehow.

[Xamonas Chegwé]

Never volunteer information to the Establishment. If I found 60k floating down stream the last people I'd call would be the cops. Like calling in priests when the local kids go skinny dipping, its always a bad idea to get them involved unless necessary.

Just be sure to report it on your income taxes as a "windfall profit" and pay the taxes due. That's usually how people get in trouble over gambling winnings.

In our poor, benighted, socialist hell, there is no tax on gambling winnings.

Somehow I doubt that. It may not be levied directly on winnings like it is here, but I'll bet my bottom dollar that it gets taxed somehow.

You'll lose that bet. And I won't get taxed on my winnings. I have worked for the gambling industry for many years. There used to be a tax on off-course, horse-racing bets (either paid as 10% extra up-front, or as 10% of any winnings) but that has been abolished.

These days, the only tax is the standard corporation tax on the earnings of casinos, bookmakers, etc. They pay tax on their profits at the same rate as any other company. Their punters are not taxed at all (except by the casino's odds, obviously!)

I deal poker to people that have played for a living for decades and never paid a penny in tax! American gamblers get taxed on big wins even if they have lost 5 times as much in the same month! But, of course, you get to play with guns over there. We are all so jealous.