The Offer

[Twisted One]

Might bump the offer up a bit to tempt him, like 40%, that leaves 30% for you, and 30% for your partner. I have made attempts to get permission to detect property only twice so far. niether having a suggestion of riches on it, more of possible historic sites. One was replied to with a "No thank you", the other was replied with "It is posted no trespassing, and it will remain that way."

Some day I will win!

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

Minelab PRO-FIND 35 Waterproof Pinpointer Metal Detector for Experts with Tone ID & Adjustable Sensitivity - Grab it through Amazon!

[Lakemonster]

I think the offer is fair.... considering.

If it were just you and the land owner I'd say the 50/50 were fair.

IF he doesnt like it.... well...then he can go shell out the cash for equipment.... years of training.... and still might come up empty after it all.

 

[limegoldconvertible68]

Why would you offer someone 10% to locate the owner of the property when you could have gone to the court house yourself and found out. Even if they couldn't help than why not pay $150 fee to a title search company or even hire a private investigator. After all that why would you are you balking at a 50/50 cut to the land owner. If this ends up in court the best you will get is a 10% finders fee for all your troubles and your legal fees will chew up most of that. Also, if the owner is so hard to find who would have known any better if you just went out onto the property and acted like you owned it, dug the cache and nobody would be the wiser?

 

[bigscoop]

Why would you offer someone 10% to locate the owner of the property when you could have gone to the court house yourself and found out. Even if they couldn't help than why not pay $150 fee to a title search company or even hire a private investigator. After all that why would you are you balking at a 50/50 cut to the land owner. If this ends up in court the best you will get is a 10% finders fee for all your troubles and your legal fees will chew up most of that. Also, if the owner is so hard to find who would have known any better if you just went out onto the property and acted like you owned it, dug the cache and nobody would be the wiser?

This is on private property. Doing as you suggest would be deliberate tresspassing & stealing.

 

[Frankn]

We searched the deed, but the deed was based on a survey several deeds back and the description didn't match todays roads. I couldn't figure how to search "forward" from that deed only backward.
I personally can't see the owner getting 50% and me getting 25% after you consider who did all the work and the time it will take to cover 9.5ac. To me it's a matter of principal. I would rather move on to one of the other caches I am working on than see that happen. Understanding human nature, I feel sure that greed will send him back to ask me to search in time. Frank

 

[Jason in Enid]

But it's NOT a 25% split. It's 50 /50. If YOU made arrangements to give away half your share to another, that is your decision.

I'm sure greed will win out and you will agree to accepting part of something over all of nothing,

 

[rockhound]

A friend of mine found a silver outcrop on a mans property he was hunting. He had obtained permission to hunt the property from the landowner. It may have been accidental as he was not hunting for treasure, but deer hunting. After talking to the property owner he tried to make a deal for a 50/50 split. The owner flat refused and claimed he would find the outcrop of silver himself. After 5 years searching and not findng anything, my friend approached him again with the offer, which was refused. The old man died and he had 2 sons and a daughter. He approached them afterwards and made them the same offer, which they refused. A couple of years ago they put the property up for auction. They had it subdivided into three tracks si that each one would have a parcel. My friend was there and was going to buy the property. When they saw him there they would not let the auction proceed because they knew one of them had silver on their parcel. He approched them once more but to no avail. he last time he approached them they told him that he would never get that property. He said OK, my son knows where it is and you will not live forever. goodbye. rockhound

 

[Lady Pirate]

To me, if you suspect some type of treasure or cache on someone's property, and before you start the hunt, it just makes sense to get everything down on paper- both land owner and MD'er signing it pertaining to agreement of any splitting. If you invest all that time on the computer and doing research, and anything else to find the score, that's your part of your investment. Then start your hunt with full knowledge of what is expected if you score. Contracts talk in court if it comes down to it. It just makes sense.... Or if you have permission to hunt on someones property and they say you get to keep anything you find, with no note signed, and then you unexpectedly score big and it don't fit in your pouch, put it back in the ground and remember where it is, leave, come back another day and act your usual self and get that note signed. CYA- it is referred to....

 

[Smudge]

Frankn,

I completely understand your position and I can appreciate how much hard work you've put into this.

But at the end of the day, its his land. Anything there belongs to him.

I think the 50/50 split is reasonable under the circumstances, and I'm just trying to be totally objective.

Maybe you all can compromise for a 60/40 split?

 

[Scar]

Frank, I posted once but it didn't go through, so if this post comes up as a double post it ain't my fault. Sometimes it takes a professional to deal with a landowner on dealing with searching for treasure under the surface of their property. I know a little about this because I do it for a living. The 10% spent on finding the property could have been used with a person that had the skills of finding the property and negotiating the deal to do the search. My clients have deep pockets, most of the time but if we hit it big it goes into the millions for the land/mineral owner and the client. My clients are in search of black gold from 1 to 3 miles below the surface of the earth. May I suggest an approach to this landowner, back off for a few months and find out everything you can about them. Don't show your hand or look anxious when you do contact them. If the cache is coins, maybe offer the best one along with the 1/3 cut.

 

[Scar]

And you do, like others have said, need to get a contract signed but hold off on that to the very end of the negotiations, when you feel comfortable with the person because the contract may cause the whole deal to go sideways.

 

[bigscoop]

Frank, I posted once but it didn't go through, so if this post comes up as a double post it ain't my fault. Sometimes it takes a professional to deal with a landowner on dealing with searching for treasure under the surface of their property. I know a little about this because I do it for a living. The 10% spent on finding the property could have been used with a person that had the skills of finding the property and negotiating the deal to do the search. My clients have deep pockets, most of the time but if we hit it big it goes into the millions for the land/mineral owner and the client. My clients are in search of black gold from 1 to 3 miles below the surface of the earth. May I suggest an approach to this landowner, back off for a few months and find out everything you can about them. Don't show your hand or look anxious when you do contact them. If the cache is coins, maybe offer the best one along with the 1/3 cut.

Not to change the subject, but I never did understand how someone can buy and own the land but not the mineral rights? If I start a thread on this could you possibly explain this with a little detail and how a buyer might, if he can, avoid this situation? Send me a PM if you're up for this.

 

[Scar]

Bigscoop, I would think that your question could apply to this thread. I am a Louisiana boy and somewhat know the law here but I am not a lawyer, so folks don't quote me as gospel here. Most states look at surface ownership and mineral ownership as two separate things. You can sell the surface but not the minerals or visa versa. Louisiana law is based in the Nepolianic laws or codes that didn't believe that someone could own something forever into perpetuity. To my notion Louisiana law is the best. When minerals are sold separate from the surface in most states they remain with the buyer until sold off to another or transferred by inheritance to a decendent. Take a case where a person would own surface and minerals to one acre in Texas and sell the surface in the year 1900 but reserve mineral rights. Lets say this person had 12 children, and each of the 12 children had 12 children and each of them had 12 children, where would we be then with persons owning the minerals, maybe 1,728, and you do it by another 12 you will come up with 20,736 people owning minerals to 1 acre in the near future. To drill a oil well I got to track them down and get an oil lease. This is BS and it is only going to get worse as time goes by. In Louisiana if you reserve minerals in a sale it is only good for 10 years, if a well is drilled in that 10 year time frame and your property is in that unit then it sets the time clock back to zero, when the well stops production then the 10 year time clock starts to run again from zero, if another well is drilled within that ten year time frame then it sets the clock back to zero again. Most states outside of Louisiana are sitting on a crap deal but how do you fix it?

 

[bigscoop]

Thanks Scar! Very well explained.

Just one last question; in your area of business, is there a clear definition of, "surface" as it applies to the land owner? Is there a certain depth, etc.?

 

[Frankn]

Bigscoop, forget surface definition it's the mineral definition that counts, sometimes water rights are separated too. Now lets get back on topic.
JASON, are you saying my partner should not get an equal share?. I can see you don't work with anybody THing and have never even gotten close to a big cache. I just consider the land owner another partner, that makes a three way split. By the way I will never go for a 50/50, I have other irons on the fire that would better serve my time. Frank

 

[NewsMan]

Suggest 50/50 after expenses.

 

[ivan salis]

50 % for you and your freind or 25% each and its a deal vs 33% each and you got zippo / no deal --is it worth the 8% differance each to you and your partner to "seal the deal" or not ? -- but if you do agree to those terms -- insist on a written agreement to prevent any other " last minute mind changes by the owner " -- like uh , it was found on my land , and since you got nothing in writing , git or I'll hold you at gun point & call the law and when they get here and I'll say I just happened to catch you tresspassing and digging on my land , trying to steal my stuff off my land --(that way he gets everything - both of you get arrested and he can then take out a "restraining warrant" against ya'll to boot)

 

[rockhound]

I would, by all means get a paper signed and probably notarized too. I think a three way split is fair, but then again, I don't own the land. Some landowners I have dealth with are really hardnosed when it comes to finding treasure on their land, so I guess that's why it is still there. Most will never be able to find it themselves and it will just remain buried, doing no one any good. Your situation is more of the norm than you realize. Many have found evidence of probable treasures when landowners refused to let the finders have a portion of the treasure. Sometimes it's easier to walk away and start another research on other likely leads elsewhere. I have gotten hot leads from some of the most unexpected places, mostly when talking to older people who remember someone sometime told them of a cache their grandfather left and the family never recoverd, since long forgotten by most of the family. Some pay off and some hit a wall when researching them. I know how much research goes into finding a probable lead and folloing it up with factual data. Spending hours pouring through newspapers and books at the library and checking deeds at the courhouse and trying to determine who owns the land now and exactly where a long lost house or structure stood is sometimes frustrating. Many hours can be spent and it is hard to walk away, but sometimes situations require us to do just that. I hope yours becomes a reality and the landowner decides that a portion is better than nothing. Good Luck. rockhound

 

[SeaninNH]

I have to say that I agree with most of the replies in this thread.

50/50 is your ONLY respectful offer.

If you had 8 other guys with you would you offer him 10%? No, that would be stupid.

It's not his fault that you included another person. That other person should be paid out of your half of the find (if you find it).

Don't be greedy. Offer the land owner 50% and be happy. He could just deny you the access to his land then you are out in the cold and you get 0%.

It's just common knowledge that the land owner gets 50% of anything found on his land.

Don't burn the bridge... Be happy with what he offered and go find that cache!

 

[Twisted One]

I'm still so border line on this idea. Being new to the hobby, I think a 50/50 split would be great for me, but in your specific case, you claim to have other possible places to search for goodies, that are just as good, or atleast better then a 50/50 split on this one.

Then I agree, you should move on, let the owner debate it, if he has not responded to a deal you agree with by the time you have exhausted your other pursuits, then you could always, try again, or reconsider at that time.

As you mentioned, it's not a do or die situation, and it isn't a deal that is going to hold you up, then hold out for what you feel is fair until that time comes along.

Happy Hunting!