Opinions and advice please.

[Polly1958]

Over ten years ago,not sure exactly when,my Uncle borrowed a collection of family photos from my parents,some were quite old.When I started doing the family history I asked Mum where the photos were and she told me that my Uncle had donated them to the local town archive without her knowledge and obviously permission.A fact he'd kept quiet until she'd asked for them.
I was really upset about this and went to see archivist,he said that because they have had them for over ten years,they were the rightful owners.I put it to him that my uncle didn't have permission and that my parents were oblivious to what happened until afterwards.I asked him if he would agree to taking copies of all the photos for the archive,and letting me have them back.He said no,that if I wanted the photos I could have copies, but each one would have to be paid for.I got in touch with the clerk of the council who told me the same.
Is it me or are they being unreasonable under the circumstances?I know my gripe should be towards my uncle but mum doesn't want to make a fuss.

[albaqwerty]

I can understand your mum not wanting to make a fuss, but surely those photos, which didn't belong to your uncle should be returned to the rightful owner?

For example, if a house was burgled and a vase was stolen but didn't resurface until 10 years had passed, it would belong to the insurance company who paid out on it but the original owner could then negotiate on buying it back from them. (I know it's not the same, but surely there is a principal at stake)

[jackthehat]

A person can only dispose of goods to which s/he holds 'title'.

These were your mothers photographs and your uncle had no 'title' to them or right to pass them on.......

A solictor's letter explaining that fact to the archivist might concentrate his mind more fully?

[Polly1958]

Thanks alba,that is a bit of different situation though.
I think that would be an idea jackthehat,maybe if I said I was seeking advice it might shake them a bit.

[albaqwerty]

I agree with Jack (I agree with her 90% of the time but don't post it!)

My example was written in haste as I feel rather riled by your situation. I hope you have the outcome you wish for.

[Davethedog]

I don't disagree with Jack and there is no doubt she is right.

What terms are you on with you uncle? If he states that he had the legal right to them, you may have to make some sort of legal pronouncement.

If you are on good terms it might lead to a falling out.

How many photos what is the cost? Can he not pay?

[Polly1958]

Thanks alba,I didn't mean any offence.
Dave We don't really have a lot to do with him,he's my Dads brother and Dad died in July,thats what prompted me to continue the fight.I know for a fact that my uncle wouldn't pay for them.
Just as well Mum didn't lend him the Victorian album at least we still have those!

[redcrx]

are they really classed as stolen though, BT? is that what the police would look at a charge of if they were involved?

[Polly1958]

No, they weren't stolen as such,but it feels like they have been.If the archive is right and they can claim ownership,I just feel they are being so petty in not letting me have copies without charging.I should really find out what kind of agreement was made between the two parties.

[redcrx]

yes, i think that even if they think of themselves in the right, they should at least allow you to take copies as a goodwill gesture :(

my question was directed at butterflytattoo as i was surprised at the suggestion that the archive had acquired "stolen goods" as such. after all, someone who buys a car that has outstanding HP on it isnt charged with handling stolen goods. As a police officer i thought she would be able to elaborate on that comment for you.

[Polly1958]

Hi redcrx,yes they could be a bit more amenable about it couldn't they?

[Davethedog]

Then if you can afford it Jack's advice is the way to go.

[albaqwerty]

no offence taken at all Polly x
I didn't read it that way :)

I think you're right, they could certainly be more amenable.