Police don’t even know whose money it is, or where it came from. I think they should be able to keep it.
If the cops can’t prove who it belongs to and they can’t prove its crime money then it should be the people who found it. They should pay income tax unless they can prove they’ve already done that.
Lesson: don’t notify police when you find money.
It’s a lot of money to try to spend without being noticed. Plus if it’s counterfeit or bank robbery money you may get into a lot of trouble when you try to spend it.
This case is strange, the money is almost certainly from drug dealing.
IANAL, consider two other situations:
- The couple never discovered the money, they sell the house in 20 years…the crown never sees any of it.
- The couple discovers the money without the electrician, they tell no one and slowly spend the cash, the crown gets the GST portion of the money back…
The other point I would make as the lawyer in this case is “How would taking this money; prevent future crime?”
The legislation is used by police to separate criminals from their ill-gotten gains, fighting crime by confiscating the profits that make it worthwhile.
The compromise the crown could make, is that the money is taxed as income. They get 33% + 15% of any money spent.
The moral of the story, is if you find a butt load of cash, don’t tell anyone.
I wonder what will happen to the four sealed bags. If the crown maintains possession of the three sealed bags, the couple will surely be pretty upset that they won’t get access to the cash in the two sealed bags. Not that they would be able to do much with one sealed bag of cash anyway.
Sounds cool, but I can guarantee some mobster would come and get it back one way or the other. I’d rather reach some agreement with Police to donate the money to the Drug Foundation or something similar. And do that very publicly. And then move house.
They bought the house in late 2021.
Oh those poor people, let them keep it, they will need it for the mortgage of the house they paid far too much for.
olice made inquiries with the previous owner of the house, a family trust, and found out who the tenants were before the couple bought the property.
None of the tenants said they had any knowledge of the money, nor did any of them have a criminal history which suggested they may have acquired it illicitly.
“Hey guys, it’s us, the police! We found this drug money in a house you used to live at, was it you selling the drugs?”
It’s a lot of money but also what possible benefit could they have to admitting it’s their drug money 😆
Exactly what I thought, nobody is going to own up and say it was theirs.
I’d love to know how that much cash ended up in a ceiling space though, someone must know it’s there, but has decided it’s not worth the risk to come back and get it. Or they’re in prison.
I’d guess either 1. they have talked to the culprit, who didn’t fancy going to prison so didn’t admit to it, or 2. one of the previous tenants had a regular visitor that they didn’t know was storing the cash there.
I know they said none of the previous tenants had a history but I’d expect most drug dealers probably don’t have a criminal history, if they are good at their job.
Maybe there was a lot more but they took it? It’s a lot of money to us but if you had cartel connections I imagine it’s the equivalent of change that got stuck in the couch.
I find it hard to imagine that being small change to anyone, but I can see someone writing it off as a loss.
Wonder how much the sparkie pocketed
Obviously we need a precedent setting ruling here. Personally I say we go 50/50, given the likely criminal link to the cash.
Allowing the couple to keep 100% would open up a pathway to a new type of money laundering, and will enable drug money to be more easily passed on to others, either deliberately or by accident.
Between income tax and sales tax when they spend it, the government will probably see half of it anyway.
