SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Gold/Mining/Energy : Copper Fox
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: specboy2012 who wrote (10134)4/15/2016 10:23:27 PM
From: louel  Read Replies (1) of 10654
 
There is no mention of it being set aside or an extension given before the claims were taken up by the Yukon'ers With out rechecking I think there was a day or two between the forfeiture date and the possession date of the new owners. There for their claim was not done by waiting in anticipation to grab it five minutes after midnight.

Nor does it say it can be set aside and returned after the claims have been allotted legally to another party. I read it as those things can be done while they are still unclaimed.

So if CXM does get it back in my estimation Scott & Martindale are entitled to a damages.

They acted 100% within the law with no part in causing the forfeiture. When claims are open it is not their responsibility to tell others of their status before staking claim upon them.

As Brundall says CXM may get them back. But I believe it will be with incurred with a just compensation payment plus perhaps an attached NSR fee which would be granted in perpetuity . That is what I would be seeking .
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News