Hoard value too low

[newseeker]

This is an old article from 2016 https://www.altonherald.com/news/hoards ... low-179619

[f8met]

But you can't compare what something was valued at 20 years before compared to the current time. It is an old article but that isn't how the valuation works otherwise everyone would be saying they should get more 10 or 20 years later because things are worth more now.

We can all think something is worth more than it is, the lead Roman ingot was a prime example of that. People told the finder it was worth £60k so he put a reserve on it, true value at auction was £25k.

[Moxey]

Perhaps the fairest way would be an open auction. However how would you stop finds leaving the country.
I found an 800 year old silver ring that is currently going through the Treasure process, a similar ring was bought by a museum in 2007 for £250. My landowner is in for a big disappointment......

[ManOnTheMoon]

The Treasure Act 1996: Code of Practice (3rd Revision) states the following about timing of the valuation:

105. The valuation will be as at the time of finding of the object and in the condition in which it was found. The Committee will consider the potential value of the object in its conserved state (which is how it would likely be sold at auction), after the deduction of cleaning and conservation costs.

Nevertheless, the Treasure Act does allow for interested parties e.g. the finder, or land owner, to have a say on valuations, but there is a time limit, which has somewhat limited scope for variation:

119. Upon receipt of the provisional valuation report(s) the Treasure Registry at the British Museum will make copies of this available to the interested parties and the relevant Treasure Registries and inform them of the date of the Committee meeting at which the case will be considered.

120. Interested parties will be invited to submit comments on the provisional valuation for the Committee’s consideration; any such submissions will be shared with the other interested parties who may wish to provide further comments.

121. Interested parties will also be able to provide private valuations (commissioned at their own expense) for the Committee’s consideration. Where it is necessary for a private valuer commissioned by an interested party to see the find in person, the valuer will have to arrange that with the institution holding the find.

126. Where interested parties disagree with the recommended valuation, they have 28 days to provide new evidence to the Treasure Valuation Committee who will then review their recommendations. The Committee will review cases up to two times, further to the initial recommendation, and only where there is new evidence to consider.

127. The 28 day limit can be extended on a case-by-case basis, where the Treasure Registry at the British Museum considers that there is a good reason for the delay.

128. After the case has either been reviewed twice, or there is no new evidence, the Treasure Valuation Committee is considered to have made its final recommendation. Where any party still disagrees with the recommendation they can make representations to the Secretary of State (Section E. 130-134).

Having highlighted the above, it is also worth pointing out that the hoard in question was found in March 1996 and declared 'treasure trove' in May 1996, so was very likely handled under the old legislation. Quite how that differs from the current Treasure Act, which came into effect the same year, I do not know.