I can't wait to see your opinion about this.
 

And which side all of you are gonna take. :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Contractor, owner feud over hidden cash

CLEVELAND - 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.

Bob Kitts said his feud with the owner of the 83-year house, a former high school classmate, has deteriorated to the point where they speak to each other only through lawyers.

Kitts said his lawyer has drafted a lawsuit that he hopes will force Amanda Reece to turn over the money she has kept.

Most of the currency, issued in 1927 and 1929, is in good condition, and some of the bills are so rare that one currency appraiser valued the treasure at up to $500,000, Kitts said.

Reece accuses Kitts of extortion.

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.

Kitts said he took some of the currency for an appraisal and learned that many of the $10 bills were rare 1929-series Cleveland Federal Reserve bank notes, worth about $85 each. There also were $500 bills and one $1,000 bill.

John Chambers, an attorney for Reece, said Kitts rejected his client's offer of a 10 percent finder's fee and demanded 40 percent of the small fortune.

Reece has no intention of backing down in the face of what she considers a shakedown, Chambers said.

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.

It may be up to a judge to decide, said Heidi Robertson, a professor who teaches property law at Cleveland State University.

Kitts said it would be unfair for him to take everything.

"For such a happy, exciting adventure, I can't believe it just went to heck like this," he said.

___

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071213/...hidden_money_2

My favorite line: "It was the ultimate contractor fantasy."

So, the ultimate fantasy is finding money in someone else's house?:rolleyes:

Short answer is it has to be the owners. If he finds gold underneath the property, is it the contractors or owner's???? Owners!

house owner 70% (whatever in his house belongs to him)
contractor 30% (yeah, we thank you for finding money in our house, here is your tips)

That's a good compromise. It's a windfall for sure. I guess the only nit is that what is it that contractors USUALLY find on projects....problems! I would share the wealth because it's the right thing to do, but I'll bet if he found wood rot instead of boxes of cash, that problem would be all mine to solve, wouldn't it? So, we share the windfall, but we don't share the risk. If it goes to court (it won't), the contractor would lose on the grounds that there is no consideration. (all upside, not trade, and no downside)

How is it in any way the contractors?

what about the descendants of P.Dunne - isn't it theirs?

If I was the contractor I would not have said a word, that being said all of the property I have my uncle, who has a construction business, does all of my work, I would hope he told me. I would wack it up with him, only because he is family

My opinion, the descendants of P. Dunne have no claim. The house was sold with the money in it and it's been a long, long, time. If their were termites, would the descendants of P. Dunne pay to exterminate them?

- I think this contractor is a complete and total ass. He deserves or is entitled to absouletely NOTHING... Now if the homeowner wanted to do something nice for the contractor, that's one thing. A little generosity is appreciated. But because said contractor thinks he is entitled, I hope he loses his case, is counter-sued and is forced to pay the legal bills for both parties.
More-so, I hope that no one ever hires him again as a contractor for the fear he might find an old piece of jewelry that fell down the drain, that he might think is his.

Contractor = HUGE ASSHOLE...

Language aside.. I believe B-Line and i have the same opinion...:thumbup: