New employye has interesing 2nd job.Legal?

[tuckerdog1]

Okay, new guy at work. Says he hired on because he needs the benefits, not so much the pay. His other job is his own business. He contracts with banks to clean out, and sometimes spruce up forclosed on houses. He gets paid a doller amount by the cubic yard of stuff he removes. Now here is where it gets a little dicey. He gets to keep whatever he removes if he wants to keep it. That has included firearms.

Now sometimes, there is the possibility of the former owner still refusing to vacate the home. And on those occations, the police sometimes come to help to be sure there is no 'trouble'. Okay, no former owner in the house, clean out begins...firearms found, The police let him keep everything except the firearms. So that makes me wonder if it is legal for him to keep the guns if the police are not there to grab them first.

Anybody have an opinion or know for sure?

Tuckerdog1

 

[Rail Driver]

In my state, the contents of the property belong to the bank in the first case. If the bank actually said he can dispose of the contents as he chooses, then he's more than likely legal. I don't see how the police being involved changes anything unless the previous owner that doesn't want to vacate, also doesn't want to leave his stuff. It's still the occupant's property until it's been abandoned (there are abandoned property laws in every state, and they differ from state to state). You'd have to research the law in your locality for a definitive answer.

 

[brickeyee]

Probably going to depend on the state.

Property left after a foreclosure might be considered abandoned, or might revert to the lender that now owns the place.

 

[Sam1911]

Actually, I'd wonder under what law the police would have the authority to take the firearms? They belong to whomever has legal right to the property left in the house. If the mortgage holder says, "this stuff is yours to dispose of as you wish," then the stuff is HIS to dispose of as he wishes. Police officers cherry picking items they want out of the lot without his approval would appear to be an unlawful taking, i.e: theft.

 

[Rail Driver]

Actually, I'd wonder under what law the police would have the authority to take the firearms? They belong to whomever has legal right to the property left in the house. If the mortgage holder says, "this stuff is yours to dispose of as you wish," then the stuff is HIS to dispose of as he wishes. Police officers cherry picking items they want out of the lot without his approval would appear to be an unlawful taking, i.e: theft.

That depends on what they're doing with them. If they're just taking them to run the numbers ensuring they're not stolen, then returning them to the ejected occupant (SOP in those cases here in my area) then it's not unlawful taking or theft. If they're just taking them, then you're right, it's theft.

 

[Birch Knoll]

I agree. I would have to question upon what authority the police are taking the firearms. The firearms belong to somebody, whether it's the property's previous owner or the bank. I don't see what claim the cops have to them.

 

[btg3]

Probably going to depend on the state.

Texas (Austin area)

The police let him keep everything except the firearms.

At least photograph the guns, get a receipt, and officer IDs (names & badges).

 

[D94R]

Seems odd one would abandon firearms in the first place?

 

[Sam1911]

Sure. But the things people walk away from when abandoning a house to foreclosure are often surprising. These generally aren't folks at their best, nor in the best state of mind. Firearms would not be the most valuable things folks often just walk away from, running from their obligations and/or just hoping to start with a few bux in their pocket and a clean slate. Some have just plain split, taking nothing more than a car-load of clothes or even a duffel bag for a bus ride to somewhere else.

It's very sad, but happens quite frequently.

 

[mljdeckard]

I thought the same thing Sam thought. The police neither have a claim to take them as property nor probable cause to seize them as part of an investigation of a crime. If the bank owns the house and the contents therein, they can do with them as they wish, and if that is to cede them to the party they have hired to clean out the house, that is entirely their choice. There is absolutely no reason for the police to seize them.

 

[KenW.]

In my state, UT, the resident has 30 days to claim property; after that the plaintif can do with it what they wish.

 

[tuckerdog1]

This is in Texas. The reason I ask, is because he has no particular interest in firearms. But he knows I do, and has told me if he came across something I'd like to have, I could have it at a good price. But don't want to be buying something that could lead to 'legal' troubles later.

Tuckerdog1

 

[Sam1911]

As long as you're not buying an unregistered NFA firearm (shotgun or rifle that someone's cut down below the legal limits, a bubba'd full-auto conversion, etc.) you really don't have legal worries.

You certainly could be buying something that had been reported stolen at some point, but there's really no way to tell that until or unless a that gun was confiscated by a law-enforcement officer and the serial numbers run. If it did come back as reported stolen, you'd have to explain where you got it, but the abandoned property sale clears you of any wrong-doing. You'd lose that gun, of course, so don't pay a fortune for any of them.

Of course, very few of us will ever have any of our firearms "run" by the police, so even if it was reported stolen the possibility that the fact would ever be discovered is mighty slim.

 

[bikerdoc]

A different twist here. I bought a house from a probate that was a mess and had not been lived in for 2 yrs. Found an old sawed off shotgun, called the PD, and they took it to be destroyed.

 

[lemaymiami]

The one situation where the weapons would be impounded (and rightly so) is if officers are called to a disturbance involving the property in question. Lots of gray areas here, but foreclosures and banks authorizing someone to clean out and otherwise deal with property left behind occasionally come into contact with the former occupant while trying to clean up the place. In the situations I've seen the former occupant will allege theft or other property crime. The bank's agent will usually claim threats, possible assault (all the fun things that folks do when they call the cops -- sometimes what's claimed has actually happened -and sometimes folks actually tell the truth to the officers... it's been known to happen...). If I sound a bit cynical here you should have heard me when I was actually handling these kinds of things - all those years ago..

At any rate, if there's a dispute over property, particularly weapons - it will be resolved at the scene amicably or the weapons will be impounded and both sides will be invited to bring in proof of ownership to obtain their release. If the weapons (or any weapon on scene) was actually involved in a dispute then whoever comes to get their weapon back will be required to obtain a court order.... At least that was the law on the books in Florida during that era (I've been out of the loop now for more than fifteen years, but that's the kind of law that probably won't change much....).

 

[Owen Sparks]

An inlaw found a loaded Smith and Wesson .40 hidden on top of a built in book case after evicting a female tennant who owed him several months of back rent. She had moved all the other valuables out and It was stashed up high enough that this woman could not reach it. We assume it had belonged to a boyfriend and she probably did not even know about it. The inlaw kept it as it was worth nearly one months rent.

 

[CoRoMo]

...both sides will be invited to bring in proof of ownership to obtain their release.

How in the world would someone prove ownership of an undocumented firearm such as one that was gifted, inherited, or purchased on a handshake?

 

[zxcvbob]

Now sometimes, there is the possibility of the former owner still refusing to vacate the home. And on those occations, the police sometimes come to help to be sure there is no 'trouble'. Okay, no former owner in the house, clean out begins...firearms found, The police let him keep everything except the firearms. So that makes me wonder if it is legal for him to keep the guns if the police are not there to grab them first...

This is in Texas.

It sounds to me like to police are stealing them. No idea whether they intend to destroy the guns, or keep 'em themselves. Did they give him a receipt? (no, of course not)

It's possible they are holding them for 90 days to give the previous occupant a chance to claim them, but a gun shouldn't be any different than any other found property.

 

[CoRoMo]

Found an old sawed off shotgun...

What do you mean?

 

[Yoda]

Watch out for renters

WE had an odd case in our neigthborhood. The property owner was WAY behind on his mortgage and his association fees, so the association foreclosed. So far, everything is within the law. The bank and the association now both have an interest in the property.

BUT, the property owner was renting the place to a third party. They were told to leave by the association, but the guy who had UNILATERALLY assumed the post as neighborhood watch coordinator (we really didn't have one) went in and "confiscated" a lot of the renter's property (big screen TVs, mircowaves, etc) to compensate the association for the back dues.

Except the renter wasn't responsible for any of the past payments. He was making his rent on time to the property owner, who himself wasn't paying his bills. It was outright theft.

I don't know the laws in your state, but if I were your co-worker, I'd pay a lawyer to be darn sure I was legal.

- - - Yoda

 

[Birch Knoll]

How in the world would someone prove ownership of an undocumented firearm such as one that was gifted, inherited, or purchased on a handshake?

You probably can't. Too bad, no gun for you.

 

[Owen Sparks]

For that matter, how can you prove ownership of an undocumented couch or the kitchen table? Shouldn't the police have to PROVE that you don't own something on your property before they confiscate it?

The burden of proof is supposed to be on the accuser.

 

[mljdeckard]

Yoda, you're right, that is outright theft.

 

[MD_Willington]

Used to do this in Canada way before the bubble popped, the bank just told us to get rid of whatever was inside. Never came across firearms, and would be required to turn them over to RCMP if we did, not sure how all that would work out with keeping firearms if I had my acquisition license.

 

[RatDrall]

The burden of proof is supposed to be on the accuser.

Not so much anymore.

Most people that get tossed into the meat grinder are considered guilty until proven innocent, unless you have enough $$$ to pay your attourney while you are found innocent (a year or more later) in court, then good luck suing the DA and whoever else prosecuted you.