Not sure if this belongs in the classifieds or not (I'm not the one selling it), but apparently the Western Pacific Railroad Museum's ex-Union Pacific GP30 849 is now for sale on Craigslist.

https://minneapolis.craigslist.org/wsh/ ... 14356.html

Think they'll take $5 for that?

READ THE AD.

They need help.

They inherited this loco and other pieces of rolling stock. It's at Portola but the heirs are in Minnesota. They rather obviously have no idea what they're doing.

This would be a good opportunity for a real preservationist to make a good-faith effort to assist these heirs. Otherwise, this has a high chance of being sold off for parts/scrap when it could be put to use by a shortline or museum.

How did it become owned by someone in Minnesota? Union Pacific donated her to the Feather River Rail Society, with the expectation that it be preserved.

This hasn't been posted here before, but Doug Morgan, who was involved in the Portola Museum some time back, and who has been involved with Western Railroad Museum preservation and operations passed away in June. These are his heirs, who apparently have no idea of the mess that was going on with the WPRM and Doug. Title to this equipment they have "inherited" is not clear, nor likely even valid. Sadly, they apparently aren't aware of this.
Doug was a controversial person, and apparently that controversy will continue beyond his life-span.

Perhaps this is a bit simplisitic, or maybe I'm opening a can of worms while unawares, but does the Museum at Portola have any interest in keeping this locomotive, static or otherwise? If so, has anyone contacted the family and suggested outright donation to the Museum? Maybe label the donating family on a bronze plaque inside the cab and call it good? These folks likely have no experience with full size railway equipment.

I have made that suggestion to the seller. Considering the ownership "mess" most of Doug's equipment is in, and their location far, far away from it all, they would be best off to donate the stuff, otherwise they will be dealing with lawyers and expenses far beyond the value of the inheritance, at least IMHO.

The only problem with that suggestion is that we have no idea whatsoever if the estate is flush with assets, or for all we know this loco might effectively BE the estate. (And the other caveat that we don't know exactly what the alleged "ownership mess" is in this case, and it's none of our business unless we actually want this UP GP30 or want to learn from possible mistakes.)

I have been witness to acrimonious divorces and/or estates where, thanks to horrendous or even malicious asset management, there end up claims against both liquid assets and tangible assets by debtors, etc. (SEE ALSO: Jensen, Richard; Hart, George........). And I am aware of one or two associates in rail preservation that I just *know* this is going to happen when they finally pass on.

Imagine your parent managed to fritter away all his/her money, or went bust from medical bills in the last six months of life. Already lost the house or whatever, car's fit for the junkyard, and instead of life insurance s/he sent a quarterly check to the museum for storage of this loco (or airplane or boat or dollhouse or silver set or painting or...) which you were told s/he "owns" and is conceivably worth six figures--maybe...... A tax break for donation does them no good if there isn't enough to deduct from.

I (probably) don't blame them for wanting money; I hope for the best for all concerned parties.......... but unless fraud is being perpetrated here, it sounds like someone needs to be helped by explaining to them just what the best options are.

Well, good points, but I didn't write the heirs with no knowledge; I had worked with Doug for a couple of decades, and although I've not been around him for about a decade, I am still in good contact with others who were very close to him. Unless he fooled us all, which is possible, the estate is probably mostly the "stuff" he left behind, and most of that 'stuff's" ownership is in debate. it is one of those situations where the only ones likely to benefit would be the lawyers. I do wish his heirs the best.
And if it seems I write this a bit cryptically, I was taught to not speak ill of the passed on; they aren't around to defend themselves nor correct the record.

Wow, sounds like a very unfortunate situation for the Heirs of the estate. I hope some knowledgeable folks can give them some assistance. Seems like a professional assessment of the value of the assets would be a first step ?

I thought cleaning out my folks house after 50 years of residence was a big job, figuring out what to do with a diesel locomotive with possibly questionable "provenance" seems staggering.

My folks house was like an history lesson, every thing they ever bought after setting up a household in the 50's was carefully layered in the basement, the first pots & pans where covered with the second set of pots & pans, etc, etc, there was 50 years of modern history all archived in one house. They where Great Depression babies, they saved EVERYTHING, because you never knew if you might need it again.

Not sure how I could help from NY, but if the heirs need ideas, put my name on the list.

My condolences and good wishes to the grieving family, Kevin

As previous posters have suggested this locomotive has a tangled ownership history... as do other railroad equipment which might or might not be owned... (and there is more than just the locomotive, boxcar and one or more hi-rail cars... )

The locomotive was pushed out of the museum for some extended period of time... to be picked up... which never happened... then taken back inside after there were threats to scrap it... It doesn't have a current cab card... it is an interesting hybrid with a 645 engine.

I know of one locomotive leaser who considered purchasing the locomotive several years ago and came to the conclusion that the liability and legal issues could destroy his business...

I too have sent an email to the family...

Randy

Well, they've been inundated by us. I sent a reply to the ad late yesterday afternoon, a fairly simple outline of what the locomotive is and gently suggesting that their late relative probably intended for it to be saved, and to please not sell it to a scrapper. Tried to be helpful, non-judgemental and to stay out of the technical weeds. We'll see if all of us together did any good.

What I am about to say is not an attempt to derail or hijack to Cuba this threads topic. But on the other hand this could also be another facet in lease agreements that needs to be addressed? Not a legal Beagle so I do not know if most lease agreements have the potential for death of the owner included in the wording?

As stated just the normal household and banking assets of two longtime married people can be a quagmire of work and sometimes legal issues {family disputes in who gets what if not spelled out}. Would a normal lease agreement hold until the time of lease was up and then responsibility go back to the estate? Or would the so called estate all of a sudden have legal right to the leased equipment? Would this have to be spelled out in the lease agreement or would a normal lease agreement be enough legal punch to hold the lease together? Not any different than your landlord passing away and the estate putting up your apt or house for sale/liquidation. Again not a lawyer {back ally or otherwise}. Would seem to me to avoid legal issues it might be an area that should be spelled out to save the question should it come up unexpectedly. Just curious. I am not against leased equipment but both sides need to protect themselves and I had never thought about this ownership after death question. Some of us are getting long in the tooth and you hopefully don't want to leave a "stinking pile" for your family or museum to be stuck with. I ask this to anybody with experience with leased equipment. Have no idea if this type of scenario is covered in normal leases or not? Thanks in advance. John.

If you lease a car or apartment you pay rent for the full term of the lease excepting stated conditions under which the lease can be broken, whether you are alive or not. Claims could be made against the estate for unpaid rent. Are we assuming there's an active lease in force here? Sounds so far pretty nebulous, like an ancient handshake sort of thing that different people remember differently.......

As of this afternoon, it appears that the craigslist posting has been deleted by its author.