Consulted a Lawyer, Re.: the Coin-star return slot contents .....

[Tom_in_CA]

Just consulted a lawyer with the following question:

A) Assuming a coin-star machine is located on private property (Lucky's Grocery store for instance).

B) Assuming some of a customer's coins get rejected, and end up in the return-tray slot. Example: silver coins, foreign coins, gold coins, etc....

C) Assuming customer wasn't aware, (or didn't care) and walks away. Leaving the coins behind. Then ...

D) Who do those coins belong to? Assuming prior customer never comes back for them ?

E) Belong to the next lucky passerby who checks the return tray slot ?

F) Belong to the Store , on whose property the machine is located ?

G) Belong to the Coin Star Vending machine Co's, who placed the machine there ?

H) Belong to the police , as Lost & Found Property ?

Here was the Lawyer's answer: "They belong to the Coin Star machine Co. " Not the store. And not anyone who passes by . And not the police, since it's on private property, not public ( and because presumably they aren't worth the $100 -or-more threshold anyhow). And he said there's usually a ph. # on the machine to call for questions, inquiries, claims, etc....

I asked him for his source/citation of law that would back up this legal opinion. He said that it's "common law". But that .... if someone cared to research it long enough, it would be in "case law". I asked "what case law can you cite?". He said that if I wanted to send them a letter, they would research further to provide the case law precedents. But that he was "100% confident".

I am not going to bother their firm to delve into it , to find case law precedents. As I don't want to test their patience But there you have it. That's the technical answer. Then he finished the phone call by saying he'd once found .50c in the change slot of the soda machine at their office lobby. And kept it.

 

[Tom_in_CA]

If coinstar doesn't pay out any money to the person for rejected coins that pass through it's machine rejected, then why would they have any claim over said rejects? They don't- which is why the person can just take their rejects back. I doubt your lawyer is correct- holding a job position and being good at it are 2 different things- relevant on everything from mechanic to lawyer to doctor.

If a person leaves the rejects there, then in my opinion it is no different than if they dropped it on the floor- or left a quarter in a shopping cart un-returned. They neglected to pay attention, left it behind- therefore lost.

I would suspect that the NATURE of how the coins get there, are irrelevant. The fact that they are there, on a situation that is legally under the control of an entity , is the pertinent facts. No different than if someone comes to your house, and tries to remove something, rationalizing that the machine you have there "rejected" them, or ... whatever. That become irrelevant to the issue. It is still your house, and all the contents therein. Your guests are not welcome to come try this logic, right ?

 

[Terry Soloman]

People, people, people! Stop encouraging Tom to get drunk and post!

 

[Honest Samuel]

How did you get the name "honest Samuel" then ?

I earn it. These coins are abandoned property.

 

[Honest Samuel]

People, people, people! Stop encouraging Tom to get drunk and post!

I agree with you and so everybody else.

 

[kcm]

I would suspect that the NATURE of how the coins get there, are irrelevant. The fact that they are there, on a situation that is legally under the control of an entity , is the pertinent facts. No different than if someone comes to your house, and tries to remove something, rationalizing that the machine you have there "rejected" them, or ... whatever. That become irrelevant to the issue. It is still your house, and all the contents therein. Your guests are not welcome to come try this logic, right ?

Yes, Tom, it IS different. Your house is not a retail store, nor is there a constant flow of guests always rummaging through your home. A store is "open to the public" - a home isn't. ....Ok, at least MY home isn't.

Another difference (and maybe the difference is simply the technical definition), is that a store is commercial property, while a home is residential property. Each has its own set of rules.

And even with commercial, you have various types - service companies such as carpet cleaning companies, where customers do not normally visit the office; manufacturing companies, where customers do not normally visit the office. Then you have retailers, where people DO visit the office, or rather the place of business (store).

Each type of area works on different rules. I really do (respectfully) believe that your attorney-on-retainer gave you false information, simply to cover his/her own butt.

 

[DeepseekerADS]

I've got this change jar....

Next time I go for groceries, I'll dump some first prior to shopping. Then, I have a receipt I'll cash in the check out line.

The rejects, which by the way might have been there prior to my arrival, well those are the rejects from my dump, and I still get credit for my dump in the checkout line.

What's wrong with this?

 

[kcm]

Nothing.

 

[BigWaveDave]

This has been fascinating.
Tomorrow morning, I will check the reject tray next to my display rack.....
If anything is in there, you all won't know what happens...
If asked, I will invoke my 5th Amendment right for fear of self-incrimination....
You know, this being a "legal" conversation and all....

 

[NHBandit]

Please post a list of all the people who have been arrested and prosecuted for removing abandoned change from a coin return. And when your finished with that lets have a serious discussion about mattress tags...

 

[kcm]

This has been fascinating.
Tomorrow morning, I will check the reject tray next to my display rack.....
If anything is in there, you all won't know what happens...
If asked, I will invoke my 5th Amendment right for fear of self-incrimination....
You know, this being a "legal" conversation and all....

............................................. *hehe*

 

[DeepseekerADS]

Bandit, that's a riot my friend

Keep the faith, it's been a while since we battled the 2nd Amendment!

Disclosure: This is NOT politics!

 

[Tom_in_CA]

.... Your house is not a retail store, nor is there a constant flow of guests always rummaging through your home. A store is "open to the public" - a home isn't. ........

You can have allowed "guests" at your house though. Just as a store can have allowed guests [customers] at their place. They can also revoke that right at any time, just as you can evict a guest at any time from your house. Notice that at any store you go to, there's always a sign (like in a brass plaque in the asphalt, or on a light pole) that no one ever reads, that says "Private Property. Right to pass revocable by owner".


I understand what you're saying though. And there may be legal distinctions between each of these two TYPES of property. But I don't think it has bearing on this particular ownership-of-items question.

Samuel: Naturally all of us will still keep taking the coins. As I said before in this thread: I am putting it out there to illustrate the answers a person can get from authority (lawyers, pencil pushers, city clerks, etc...), when you ask "can I?" type questions.

So actually then: let's just assume this lawyer was wrong. Then the illustration just becomes stronger yet: See what can happen when you ask "can I ?" questions to desk-bound bureaucrats ?

And no ...... I'm not drunk! haha

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Please post a list of all the people who have been arrested and prosecuted for removing abandoned change from a coin return. And when your finished with that lets have a serious discussion about mattress tags...

Fear of "arrest", "tickets", and "confiscations" are sometimes put out there to bolster the notion that we md'rs need to go around clarifying and asking "can I?" type questions. For whether or not they can detect innocuous beaches, parks, schools, forests, etc... And I have often asked the same thing : "Can you show me any examples of someone ticketed and arrested for detecting at a public place (that didn't have a specific prohibition in place). And then all you hear, is the sound of chirping crickets.

So too, in this case, would there probably be zero examples of any facing legal ramifications for taking the coins.

But what about the [gold?] coins in the news story that started all this ? If that father got wind of the fact that someone has his gold coins, that you were seen pulling from the slot after the drug addict left: Don't you think they legally belong to the father still ? (Whether directly to him, or to coin-star, which might have the subrogated duty to return those gold coins to the victimized dad?) .

All of our rationale that we can keep the coins, would probably go out the window in the case of the addict son who dumped his dad's coin collection into the machine.

 

[kcm]

You can have allowed "guests" at your house though. Just as a store can have allowed guests [customers] at their place. They can also revoke that right at any time, just as you can evict a guest at any time from your house. Notice that at any store you go to, there's always a sign (like in a brass plaque in the asphalt, or on a light pole) that no one ever reads, that says "Private Property. Right to pass revocable by owner".


I understand what you're saying though. And there may be legal distinctions between each of these two TYPES of property. But I don't think it has bearing on this particular ownership-of-items question.

Samuel: Naturally all of us will still keep taking the coins. As I said before in this thread: I am putting it out there to illustrate the answers a person can get from authority (lawyers, pencil pushers, city clerks, etc...), when you ask "can I?" type questions.

So actually then: let's just assume this lawyer was wrong. Then the illustration just becomes stronger yet: See what can happen when you ask "can I ?" questions to desk-bound bureaucrats ?

And no ...... I'm not drunk! haha

I "do" understand what you're saying, but still I have to say: "I'M RIGHT!! I'M RIGHT!! I'M RIGHT!!" ...I have to say that because some day, it might just come true.

 

[Honest Samuel]

Tom: If there are coins on streets and sidewalks, who is the legal owners?

 

[Tom_in_CA]

Tom: If there are coins on streets and sidewalks, who is the legal owners?

Hi Samuel. I dunno. Let me take a crack at your question this way:

Are you aware that various city and county parks (when md'rs have gone in asking if they can detect), have been told "no" : On the grounds of prohibitions on "harvest " & "remove " verbiage. So that tells you they consider fumble fingers losses to now be a part of the "park features ".

Your question is interesting, in that.... why should coins in a public park be any different than coins on a public street?

 

[foiler]

By taking the coins you are doing the 'company' a favor. The obligation, legally, for thr company is to take possession of the 'abandoned coins, secure them in a separate place for accounting, then by law make reasonable attempts to locate the person who left the coins, contact them and either return them to the rightful owner or, then follow the state law for abandoned property. There is costs to the company to do that. Rather for the few cents that are left, they disappear. What we have here is the classic 'Shultzie moment" "I see nothing, I hear nothing, I say nothing.

 

[Swaveab]

I totally reject that the Coinstar company legally has rights to the rejected coins. First of all, if the guy who puts the coins in gets rejects the lawyer is now saying it belongs to Coinstar. To any who believe this to be so is foolish because Coinstar could've elected to keep all rejects in another internal bin and they did not, but provided a return slot for the taking back of these rejected coins. When these are left by the person who put them in then it's free to anyone who cares to collect it.

As to a child who dumps his father's coin collection in, that does now belong to Coinstar and it is their discretion of whether to return them or not, providing face value is replaced.

 

[kcm]

I totally reject that the Coinstar company legally has rights to the rejected coins. First of all, if the guy who puts the coins in gets rejects the lawyer is now saying it belongs to Coinstar. To any who believe this to be so is foolish because Coinstar could've elected to keep all rejects in another internal bin and they did not, but provided a return slot for the taking back of these rejected coins. When these are left by the person who put them in then it's free to anyone who cares to collect it.

As to a child who dumps his father's coin collection in, that does now belong to Coinstar and it is their discretion of whether to return them or not, providing face value is replaced.

AAAAANNNNDDD WE HAVE A WINNER!!

You're exactly right! As their machines are "designed" with a reject tray, then they have chosen, through "their design", to reject the coins. If they are rejected, then they do not belong to Coinstar, as Coinstar chose not to accept what the machine rejects. As well, it is Coinstar employees that calibrate the machines, further pressing the resolve that Coinstar rejects and does not want the coins. So whose coins ARE they, you ask?

First-come, first-serve - the first person to check the reject slot and find coins there with no apparent owner.


...Now, with ALL THAT said, let me throw a curve ball into the mix. If, and I do mean "IF"(!!) Coinstar could figure out how to cost-effectively make a machine that could (and actually "would") distinguish between all coinage of all nationalities and periods of time, could separate said coins into their proper category, and do so without fail or error, then I am 100% certain that they would!! However, they have chosen to reject the coins that their machines have trouble with. After all, why put machines out there that are SO high-tech so as to do all that, when some kid could come along and see if his PB&J sandwich could fit inside? Or maybe his soda? Or an idiot (so-called) parent getting rid of a dirty diaper?

That's why I have said all along that it's a question of Common Sense. It's also a question of cost-savings and the ultimate price of doing business with machine rather than having thousands of employees working kiosks full-time rather than machines. It costs Coinstar less money to have the setup they currently do. So when Foiler says that we're doing Coinstar a positive service, that's true. It keeps their machine designs simple, which decreases their costs. ....In my honest opinion, anyhow.

 

[ARC]

Finders keepers law applies in all places everywhere.

When no one is looking of course :P