Current Event for the Week of 12/14/07
Contractor Fights Owner for Cash in Wall
While working, a contractor found money stuffed between walls in a house. The house belongs to a man named Bob Kitts and he believes the money shall be his but the contractor believes different.
Read the Article here
Who do you think the money should go to and why? Does the contractor have any say in this by just stumbling across the situation? Why do you think the money was hidden?
While working, a contractor found money stuffed between walls in a house. The house belongs to a man named Bob Kitts and he believes the money shall be his but the contractor believes different.
Read the Article here
Who do you think the money should go to and why? Does the contractor have any say in this by just stumbling across the situation? Why do you think the money was hidden?
posted by phs_sociology at 9:46 PM
6 Comments:
Even thought the contractor was the one that found the money, I kind of think it should go to the owner of the house. By owning the house, everything in their house should be their property. I kind of think it as his a contractor would "find" a couch and claim it as their own. The fair thing to do would be just to split if 50/50 to make the problems go away. This is a very interesting story though because either side as legitament arguements. I think the money was hidden because backs were very unreliable during the great depression and no one trusted them.
I think that the money should go to the owner of the house. By being the owner, everything that is found in the house should be his. On the other hand,I think that the owner should give some to the contractor because he found the money while doing a job. But for the contractor saying that he should get all of it, doesn't make any sense.
I agree with two previous comments about the money going to owner of the house. The whole "finders/keepers" law is rather immature and the owner of the house should be entitled to everything in the house, whether she knew it was there or not. The contractor is just being greedy, he even said himself that he called her and she came home, and together they found even more money. So that entitles him to not even 40% of the money in the house. I wouldn't be surprised though if the contractor did walk away with something though.
i think the money should also go to the owner. When he bought they house, everything in it was handed over to his poissession, so everthing in it is his. i can maybe agree with giving the contractor at least soem money because if it wasnt for him, the money may have never been found. but i still think that the owner should get most, if not all, of it.
Well since the money is dated from 1927-1929 the owner at the time probably was smart and decided not to invest all his/her money in the stock market. The contractor i think could be able to share the money, but since it was on the property it probably does go to the owner. I don't know enough of the laws or legal proceedures to know if the contractor or the owner is right. I guess if i would have found the money i would have also wanted a certain amount of the money and if i was the owner i would probably have wanted to keep most of the money.
I think that the money should go to the owner of the house because it was on his property and its his. I dont think that the contractor really even has a case toget this money. I wish that i could have found money in my house like that. Personally i think the owner is lucky that the contractor told him the money was there because he could had been dishonest and took it for himself.
Post a Comment
<< Home