In all of our hast to announce that America is turning into a Socialist State, we may be missing the creep of government here. via Kids Prefer Cheese
San Francisco resident Carla Ruff’s safe-deposit box was drilled, seized, and turned over to the state of California, marked “owner unknown.” “I was appalled,” Ruff said. “I felt violated.”
Unknown? Carla’s name was right on documents in the box at the Noe Valley Bank of America location. So was her address — a house about six blocks from the bank. Carla had a checking account at the bank, too — still does — and receives regular statements. Plus, she has receipts showing she’s the kind of person who paid her box rental fee. And yet, she says nobody ever notified her.
To make matters worse, Ruff discovered the loss when she went to her box to retrieve important paperwork she needed because her husband was dying. Those papers had been shredded.
//And that’s not all. Her great-grandmother’s precious natural pearls and other jewelry had been auctioned off. They were sold for just $1,800, even though they were appraised for $82,500.
“These things were things that she gave to me,” Ruff said. “I valued them because I loved her.”
Okay, okay. So the bank made a mistake, right? A horrible one. But a mistake. Right? Huh, not right?
California law used to say property was unclaimed if the rightful owner had had no contact with the business for 15 years. But during various state budget crises, the waiting period was reduced to seven years, and then five, and then three. Legislators even tried for one year. Why? Because the state wanted to use that free money.
“That’s absolutely correct,” said California State Controller John Chiang, who inherited the situation when he came into office. “What we’ve done here over the last two decades has been dead wrong. We’ve kept the property and not provided owners with the opportunities — the best opportunities — to get their property back.”
Chiang now faces the daunting task of returning $5.1 billion worth of unclaimed property to people. Some states keep their unclaimed property in a special trust fund and only tap into the interest they earn on it. But California dumps the money into the general fund — and spends it.
“It’s supposed to be segregated and protected,” Palmer said. “California has taken all of that $5.1 billion and has used it as a massive loan.”
Awesome! Go California!
I suppose then, the bank had no records of who rents these boxes? Isn’t there a monthly charge? Doesn’t the bank send out a bill, or draft against the account for payment due?
The actions of the bank are criminal and the state is culpable.
But Californians really shouldn’t complain. They get what they voted for – social programs the state can no longer afford.
Note too, that Pelosi, Waxman, Waters, Boxer, the Democrats who are ransacking the U.S. Treasury with their absurd and obnoxious spending programs, are also from California.
I haven’t seen the movie 2012 yet, but I think that when the scene showing California sliding into the Pacific is shown, I just might stand up and applaud. I just might.
I suppose then, the bank had no records of who rents these boxes?
Her name was right on the box. And yes, it is criminal.
I may go see 2012, if only to cheer.
-keep ‘er right.
Go figure, a state that has been run by Republican Governors for decades steals from its own people. Yeah, not too surprising.
All government is dangerous. Doesn’t matter if it’s Democrats or Republicans.
We just need less of it.
RE:Go figure,…
Schwarzenegger recently signed into law changes to how owners of unclaimed property are notified.
http://www.uppo.org/news/31495/California-AB-1291-Signed-Into-Law.htm
Most if not all states have similar laws for the same purpose.
Schwarzenegger recently signed into law
Nice.
‘All government is dangerous’
WTF? Do you prefer anarchy? No? Oh, you mean all government that doesn’t support and regulate the things you agree with is bad.
WTF? Do you prefer anarchy?
No. I simply prefer a government that fears the people. And is just a little smaller than it needs to be.
Oh, you mean all government that doesn’t support and regulate the things you agree with is bad.
What does that even mean?
“What does that even mean?”
You agree that human activity should be regulated: i.e., murder, rape, assault, etc. What else should be regulated then? Maybe you don’t think government should regulate those things.
Why would you want something to be “smaller than it needs to be?” If it “needs” to be, then doesn’t it NEED to be? That seems like a no-brainer.
You agree that human activity should be regulated: i
I think that Government should ensure each of ours Liberty; that is I can not take what is yours.
Additionally, Government should enforce contracts. That is, when the milk vendor enters into agreement with the customer for a gallon of milk, he is not adding water.
Last, Government should pass laws where the cost of a thing is not borne by the benefactor of that thing. For example, when a company throws waste water into the river.