Yes, the boundary agreement is for the back tract, not in dispute. This was done in 1998 and the surveyor describes the monument in question as the boundary between four parcels. For some reason multiple surveyors will not acknowledge this.
If you plot out our deed and hold these monuments, it closes with a 1?? margin of error.
Appears to be a protracted (not surveyed) subdivision 1950's.?ÿ May not be sufficient evidence to prove any one location over another.?ÿ I do this type of work, but not licensed in NC.?ÿ 5k-10k, plus another 5k or so for court prep and testimony; I imagine you could find someone in NC that provides this type of service.?ÿ Plus attorneys fees 5k-30k (for each party) depending on appeals or not.?ÿ No guarantee of outcome.?ÿ So, you might be better off not finding someone that offers this type of service.?ÿ Instead, work toward an agreement or concede; depends on value of the area to you.
Developers want quick and cheap division of lands for sale to make the most profit.?ÿ Many years later these problems crop up. This is why now there are subdivision regulations requiring setting of monuments and ties to coordinate systems (as mentioned by Holy).?ÿ The fault (if one is looking for that) is with the original developer, not with the current surveyors.?ÿ It may seem inappropriate that the surveyor is a cousin of your neighbor, but I highly doubt that has anything to do with it.?ÿ Six or Seven hemming and hawing just illustrates the evidentiary problem in these old paper subdivisions that produced little or no original surveying field work.
Surveyors are required to retrace established boundary lines. When the record data does not work out and "fit" within the adjoining data, nor does it match any established corner monuments, then you have a "fatally ambigous" record and no surveyor is able to merely stake it on the ground. Additional evidence is required. The existing boundary agreement is a red flag. Hire a surveyor to collect all relevant data, the prepare a plat showing all measured gaps and conflicts. In Colorado 38-51-106(k) requires surveyors to plat all conflicting boundary data. Pay up front. When this plat is delivered, if there are any unresolved boundaries, seek another boundary line agreement or quit claim any sliver that overlaps. This is by far the easiest of your options. There is no such thing as winning in court.
Thanks for your response.
My question for surveyors, why wouldn??t you run out the deed calls from the existing and established documented corner monument to retrace the boundary? I have yet to get a surveyor to do just that. They all want to redesign the neighborhood and change established lots. We find ourselves in this situation because the neighbors are disputing what is on record. We do want to come to an ??agreement? with these neighbors and settle, but I have to know the baseline which is the recorded line. Where does the paperwork say it is before we make an agreement.
Surveyors are required to retrace established boundaries where they exist on the ground. If the record is ambiguous, which is common, and the record does not "fit" existing monuments, then you have a fatally ambiguous record, and you will have to address conflicts with the legal means in your state. The existing boundary line agreement is a red flag. Hire a surveyor to collect all data and prepare a plat that shows gaps, overlaps where they lie. In COLORADO this is "conflicting boundary evidence" required by 38-51-106(k). Pay up front. When you receive the plat, consider either a quit claim deed, boundary line agreement or resubdivision as by far the easiest of your options for boundary resolution. There is no such thing as "winning" in court.
?ÿ
Yes, the existing boundary agreement moved the line a 1.5?ø over because the carport pad was poured over the line 20 years ago. The surveyor who performed the agreement is now the county commissioner. He also did the adjoining survey of the Lodge that was the owner of all this land back in the 1930s. He found all the monuments and set one. Same for the agreement, just one set. What the agreement shows, is that the monument he found, he describes as the corner between tract 1 and 2 and the corner of the two adjoining lots.
I tried to hire him first, because he is the ??best? in town. He immediately brought up my neighbor by name and said my neighbor could tell me where the line is. That was a red flag for me. Later after the cousin supplanted the surveyor we hired, we called him again and he said he didn??t want to get involved. The problem with that, is he would be the best person to solve this ??problem? but has shown some red flags as far as conflicts of interest. He is also up for re-election this year.
Have any of you professionals supplanted another surveyor? And if so, did you definitively say how much the other guy is wrong before conducting your own field work? That was the most shocking thing about this situation, we hired someone, whom sets one lost iron per the deeds and then within hours we had a small town shake down run him off. Is that something that is common in the surveying industry?
A true retracement survey with few original monuments in place will weed out the so-called beep beep surveyors and button punchers that have a preassigned location to put their monuments from the real investigators who diligently search and use shovels to find ancient evidence that lurks beneath the ground.
I can't answer your problem without making competent research for possible monuments of record to look for and making an intense on the ground search for evidence and then sitting down with all the compiled data and hoping there is enough real evidence of past surveys to make a decision on.
good luck
The Lawyer teaching a boundary dispute seminar I was in years ago said don't hire lawyers, don't hire Surveyors, he said get a good bottle of wine and go next door and make friends with your neighbors. He said once the lawyers get involved they say don't talk to each other except through the lawyers and it all goes downhill from there.
It sounds like the subdivision is very poorly done and there may be no clear or easy answer. Just holding one point and running out the record geometry is not proper boundary Surveying practice. I get what your saying about Surveyors trying to "fix" the entire neighborhood, they are trying to establish some sort of rational pattern (which may not exist).
Thanks for your response.
Yes, we were friends with the neighbors, until I got tired of their daughter parking on my lawn and garden. When surveyor number one showed us the boundary they got nasty, I assume it??s because it made them out to be liars. When we first moved in two years ago, the neighbors said the previous owners ??gave? them a pie slice. It??s just too bad that neither of the parties made it official. From the day we purchased we actively possessed our land. Cleaning up the old landscaping and renovating the mid century home. When the family shake down happened we erected a fence set back 3ft which instigated them to start litigation. The cousin recorded his map at the register of deeds 3 months later, the day before they served us.
This all seems so simple to us just being laymen homeowner and tax papers. The old plat definitely is a protracted subdivision from a ww2 vet in 1950. I was told this was the first planned subdivision in waynesville. It appears the county commissioner who did work in the past handled it appropriately by describing the old marks in the ground that were very close to the intent of Nathan Rogers.
Simply put (I hope) there really is no baseline or point of beginning, especially in a protracted subdivision such as yours. The corner monument could be existing and established for one purpose but not for the purpose you want it to be. Laws and rules for surveying are in place that are supposed to result in not changing established lots, and not redesigning neighborhoods. However, there are evidentiary problems even if all surveyors involved are very good at what they do. I would be looking for the most permanent current physical monument (paved road maybe) possible to tie any boundary agreement to, in addition to an accepted coordinate system such as state plane. You have a block of lots and everyone has a deed for a certain amount, but maybe there's not enough (remember it was not surveyed on creation). So, we can't just give one person what their deed calls for absolutely, based on one monument, when that conflicts with what another persons deed calls for based on another monument. It gets very complicated balancing evidence and equities involved.
There is a series of blocks in an addition to a small town near here with a problem that could possibly be like your situation.?ÿ The plat was drawn in 1868 with outside dimensions of precisely 1320 feet by 2640 feet.?ÿ That is a common fraction of a square mile.?ÿ Surveyors know that such fractions virtually never match the standard numbers, as were used here.
The blocks were laid out when needed, not all at one time in 1868.?ÿ Then, later, surveyors attempted to establish where specific lots should be within those blocks.?ÿ For a given block the first survey might have been for a lot of the east end.?ÿ The second survey might have been for one on the west end.?ÿ No one measured the entire addition, then measured the entire block, then set the lot corners.?ÿ Nope.?ÿ That was not the normal situation as this was all slow work compared to our capabilities today.?ÿ Thus, the blocks in my example have been found to be from eight to 18 feet short in an east-west dimension.?ÿ This was not discovered until too many lots had been surveyed using differing methods by different surveyors in different decades.?ÿ The land owners had assumed each surveyor had done perfect work and developed their tracts accordingly.?ÿ Eventually the shortage was discovered.?ÿ Somebody somewhere was coming up with less land than they should have because they were being expected to absorb the entire shortage for their block on their lot because they were the last to learn of the shortage.
Bad stuff happens.
Yes, that definitely sounds like what is going one here. Our tracts and house was established many years prior to others and they measured from the control point. When the other lots became established it was short of the old plat. So at that point, I would think adverse possession would win our our behalf because of our predecessors, marks, title.
I understand what you are saying, thank you. What I find interesting is the neighbor in dispute never had a survey in 60 years. There deed refers to lot 30 per the plat. No description. Our deed and everyone else??s around has a description that all line up. What seems to have happened is when lot 30 and 32 was sold they didn??t survey and the it was sandwiched between marked lots. They lost somewhere between 8-11?? between lot 30 and 32
Duane,
Would you tie it to lot 30??s outside line ? This is the map for the boundary agreement proportioned to deed north
