[wideawake]

It is not the state’s job to inform the owners of record - it is the responsibility of the financial institution that has custody of the assets.

[coloradan]

It is if the state wants to seize them.

[Wonder Warthog]

"It is not the state’s job to inform the owners of record - it is the responsibility of the financial institution that has custody of the assets."

S'pse they're in a safe deposit box?? Sorry, but I disagree. ANY action that the state initiates that might impact on a citizens property MUST require a notification action (and not a small print article in some obscure weekly newspaper). A registered letter directly to the property owner is the only acceptable venue.

We just had a major go-around in Washington on a similar subject (in this case it was property seizure for mass transit).

[Sacajaweau]

A change of address is the most common way that funds become lost. I got a check for almost $700 but it took a little effort.

Clue: Send those change of address cards to everyone you can think of!!

[commish]

It is not the state’s job to inform the owners of record

Actually it is the state's responsibility. if you read the article you will see that the state's failure to attempt to find and notify people of these confiscations is the basic foundation of the lawsuits that the appeals courts have ruled on.

The State of California dismantled the division that tracked down and notified people 20 years ago, and now try to get by with a periodic "blanket" notice in newspapers.

While they can't be bothered looking for people, the State of California is more than happy to pay $20-50 MILLION a year to companies whose sole purpose is to SEARCH for "dormant" assets. ($400 million siezed/Companies get 6-12% of siezures)