This rebuttal is based solely on my interpretation of how I perceive this Contract to be applicable in this situation, and shall not be construed as a personal attack, as implied.
Before I provide a rebuttal to this subject, if you remember your Contract Law 101, a contract has 4 primary elements; an offer, secondly; an acceptance, thirdly; the name of each participant, and lastly a time/date/place.
The offer would include the description of the items sought, in broad terms including the split percentage. The acceptance is the owners terms or conditions.First let me say it was as fair and balanced as you can ask for. (In your eyes, its fair and balanced...however richm only wants to get on the property as simply as possible)
If you have been after a cache of any size you will need something like this. (Agreed, however richm is not talkin g about bringing backhoes or other big rigs onto the land...this is a simple shovel and dig search)
I have never had anyone question it. They have all signed it. The agreement is an non-lawyer's(me) attempt....didn't see anyone else posting one...what took YOU so long? (I expressed an opinion only...not a personal attack and its certainly not a pissing match...so let it be a discussion)
Your opinion is that someone is trying to rip someone off...I am not, and resent the implication. IF you read it you see that the agreement is actually stacked for the landowner. This is so that everyone is covered. (The opinion pertaining to the contract and is not a personal attack...)•
The first line crossed out ...do you really think this is bad….let us reason together here… I found a good cache, the farmer was not the original owner of the cache his kids could have came after their share if they were part owners of the farm it was found on. (This is site-specific and the search & share is between the person searching and the legal owner...and is not relevant to third parties who do hold ownership)•
Number 6 was because I felt it was only fair that I would furnish all the equipment…do you FEEL I should make him do it? (No. Is the property owner aware, in richm's situation, that big equip is being brought in...that owner would probably shlt a brick and back away from any further dealings)•
What is wrong with furnishing them a list of people who might discreetly help them sell their portion? (Not pertanent to a contract)•
This farmer had not contact at all with people who could sell the coins…and if he wanted I would have done it for him…I was glad to be digging on his property! What is wrong with that? Unlike you it nere entered my mind to rip him off. (Again, lets disperse with personal attacks and direct the conversation to the contract) (Again, this is not pertanent to a contract)•
The other persons list: number 2—see the first line (When somebody enters a property with a big rig and begins an exploration, that person shall be responsible for numerous possibilities of damages that can be caused, or left) (The owner would be well advised to have the Contract reviewed by an attorney...RED FLAG)•
This is self protection if you think its ripping someone off well you are sadly mistaken. (I assume that you are referring to the Owner paying all legal fees...another RED FLAG...again, the owner would be well advised to have the Contract reviewed by an attorney...) The idea that the farmer may have got greedy became a possibility, then a reality …he decide not to let us dig…if he would have signed this then legal action could have made him let us dig it and it would have cost him not me…(What if for some reason you are the cause for a STOP NOTICE, is it right for the Owner to pay for your screwup or whatever?...think not) which would motivate him to be fair. (Wherever there is an IN, there needs to be and equal OUT statement...so if you want to protect your butt, then provide equal means for the owner, as well)
• Number 5 what in the world is wrong with that? I, unlike you. have a cutting edge piece of high tech equipment I don’t want him revealing to anyone else, and my methodologies are mine why does he need to tell anyone? (Another RED FLAG...again you are limiting the owner rights...again, the owner would be well advised to have the Contract reviewed by an attorney...) •
The there is the big one…why not let him be responsible for paying all the taxes on HIS (did you really read this?) share. He needs to know he is responsible…he may come after you saying he thought YOU were responsible! (Not your call...its his problem and yhou are not in the position to control this situation...Another RED FLAG...again you are limiting the owner rights...again, the owner would be well advised to have the Contract reviewed by an attorney...) •
I really don’t think you understood the divided sections on this agreement. Now if you are such an expert provide us with one that is legal and is fair and balanced more than this! If you don’t then apologize OR do nothing it will mean the same thing. (We are discussing how this contract is applicable to this situation, and its obvious its not.) (Secondly, there are no apologies due as this is a discussion of a contract and how its applicable to this specific situation...AND NOT A PERSONAL ATTACK...)
Just so you know on many ocasions I have got by with a verbal OK or a handshake up until this one I told about above. It cost me my half of over $900,000...so unitl you do that just go ahead and get your verbal and limited agreements. (We now have two opinions, yours and mine...I think that I'd look forward to a peer review.)