House clearance stash found

kalaika

On the ownership issue, I agree with Debtfreechick and esmerelda.

The OP was paid to clear a house, which he did (he just can't now specify exactly which clearence this particular item came from). As part of this agreement, he gets to dispose of the items as he sees fit and can make a profit. It doesn't matter what those items are.

If he's lucky he'll get high value items to get rid of and make a nice profit. If he's unlucky he'll get a houseful of tat that is worthless, but he's still been paid for the clearance. As it happens, on this occassion he has found a wedge of cash. It's still his and, I think, should form part of his business profits.

The relatives of the deceased could have easily searched for high value items before they employed him to clear all the items out. If they didn't, then they lose out on the value of the items, but then the pay off is that they don't need to worry about delving through their loved one's belongings at a time when they're grieving.

kalaika

Pee wrote: »

Hang on, in the example above, if you got the £10,000 painting, wouldn't that be a CGT issue not an income tax issue? Or maybe it is because it's a business?

Not a CGT issue. The items have been received as part of his business, with the purpose of selling on to make a profit. Therefore the items form part of his trade and any profit generated form part of his business profits, not CGT.

Errata

House clearance companies are always coming across secret stacks of cash.
Ethical companies understand they were not meant to have the cash and ensure the person who contracted them to do the job receives it.
Unethical companies don't.
The OP knows which of these his company is.

MrCarrot

esmerelda98 wrote: »

Why on earth would the money not belong to the original poster?

If the sum in question was 20 million pounds all in bank notes, would you still take the attitude that it belongs to someone who was paid £100 to clear out the house? I think you'd find the law would not agree.

Nessynoo

Stuck in the middle? Why not give it to charity if you can't identify the owner/NOK?

nic_santorini

I work in the legal field and there is a fine line between what the beneficiaries thought you were clearing and what you actually found. To ensure that you are legally entitled to it, you should make all possible attempts to find the owner and another forum user suggested contacting past persons to see if they recognise the item it was found in. Otherwise, hand it to the police, they will register it in special property and then you can reclaim it as 100% yours. As for the tax, don't work in the tax field but would think it would be counted as profit. But I maybe wrong on the latter.

shaun1d

Thank you for all of your comments.

The ownership of the money is not an issue, as it clearly states in our terms "all items cleared become the property of the company", in exactly the same way as if we, as earlier mentioned, found a valuable antique.

Our earnings are in selling the items we clear, the low price we charge for the clearance barely would cover the disposal of the items as council tips charge us £80-90 per tonne, (an average house would be around 2 tonnes).

My question was if I would be liable for tax on this money, the answer to this seems to be a clear yes.

Errata

Money is not an item, it's money - a complete different category.

Pumpkinface_2

shaun1d wrote: »

My question was if I would be liable for tax on this money, the answer to this seems to be a clear yes.

I don't think it is that clear, because opinion is divided on whether you are entitled to keep the money at all. I would come down in the No camp. I recently had to clear my late father's house and had I found you had done this to me, I would without doubt report you to the police. I think it would be obvious in any court of law that "money" is not intended to be included in the house clearance.

kalaika

Pumpkinface wrote: »

I don't think it is that clear, because opinion is divided on whether you are entitled to keep the money at all. I would come down in the No camp. I recently had to clear my late father's house and had I found you had done this to me, I would without doubt report you to the police. I think it would be obvious in any court of law that "money" is not intended to be included in the house clearance.

I disagree. Why would you report him to the police when all he had done is cleared the house that you asked him to and took the assets contained within? Why would it be 'obvious' that cash isn't included in the clearance?

I can't see why you would have any claim over it, just because you didn't know it was there. Would you equally report him if he found an antique Ming vase worth millions, claiming it shouldn't have been part of the clearance and that it should belong to you?

My opinion is that this cash hasn't been 'found'. He has been paid to clear a house and the cash happened to be part of that job so I think he has a claim on it. If this cash had been randomly found, say, in the street then, yes, he should go to the police to report it and see if anyone claims it. But I think there is a difference.