Client called today and wants a survey between his property and neighbor.
I have worked for neighbor in the past, but not on this property.
Would you take on the job?
Charlie c, post: 437229, member: 6798 wrote: Client called today and wants a survey between his property and neighbor.
I have worked for neighbor in the past, but not on this property.
Would you take on the job?
Wouldn't you set the line in the same place if you were hired by the neighbor? Then there should be no conflict.
Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
A wise man once said, "If you try to please everybody someone is going to get mad." And it's pretty much true. Don't let that get in the way of your work.
As a professional surveyor one should have the ability to remove their personal acquaintances from the facts of a survey.
Professional Land Surveyors are NOT advocates for their clients (like a defense attorney IS).
Loyal
Don't believe I could count the number of times this has come up over the decades. Get'r'done!!!
As mentioned above, we are not advocates. We are seekers of the truth.
You would be perhaps the ideal person to do it...
IMHO, if it was me I'd let the client know of your previous work with the neighbor, then if they are ok with that ask if they are ok with you notifying the neighbor, so that there are no surprises or suspicions.
If you think there is a reason you can't ethically do this job, you need to go back and reassess your entire career.
Charlie c, post: 437229, member: 6798 wrote: Client called today and wants a survey between his property and neighbor.
I have worked for neighbor in the past, but not on this property.
Would you take on the job?
Disclose your prior client relationship to alleviate any misgivings.
In Ca it is actually a law to do so.
what's the issue??
Trying to decide when to say anything to the client about connections to the adjoiner can be tough because there is no rule of thumb to follow.
On one recent job the client was someone I have known well for 50 years and for whom I have done prior jobs. One adjoiner is a fellow I have known as far back as I can remember and we were classmates in high school and I have done jobs for two of his sons. The other adjoiner is a fellow I have known as far back as I can remember and were in school together and I have done a prior survey for him in a different section. And, my helper one day on this project is married to the client's niece.
We set up the base station on a hill top on one of the adjoiners. That was great. It gave me an excuse to drive past the house, far off the road, where my father's parents were married as that quarter section was owned by my grandmother's aunt and uncle in 1913.
It is common for me to have jobs where I have known the client and several of the adjoiners for decades. I've had three generations of the same family as clients.
I would survey his boundaries and mark them. I'd even make sure to say hi to the fella next door.
It would only be a problem if there issues between them. I'm going to ask that question anyway...
First, I don't see this as any sort of "ethics" issue. If we excluded surveying any boundary that may or may not adjoin someone we either know or have worked for in the past, we would quickly run out of places we could survey. But In my mind this brings up an interesting point.
If I'm reading the OP correctly Charlie c may be "uncomfortable" in surveying for the adjoiner of a previous client. And I will fall short of any sort of admonishment; been there, done that.
If a job makes you uncomfortable or places you in a private/ personal situation you would like to avoid; by all means, turn down the job. And it's perfectly OK to do so. But don't confuse it with ethics.
You have to let the potential client know beforehand. Not that you have any issues surveying it and remaining unbiased in your opinion. But the potential client, once informed of the prior relationship, has the opportunity to figure out if he has an issue with it, and can make the decision whether he wants to trust you or go with someone else ho has no former relationship.
Quite possibly your client referred the neighbor to you. I'd drop the client a note and get to work. .
clearcut, post: 437257, member: 297 wrote: Disclose your prior client relationship to alleviate any misgivings.
In Ca it is actually a law to do so.
That raised my eyebrows a bit so I looked it up. Here's the salient code:
(b) Conflict of Interest:
[INDENT](1) If a licensee provides professional services for two or more clients on a project or related projects, the licensee shall disclose in writing to those clients and property owners or their authorized representatives his or her relationship to those clients.[/INDENT]
Mike Marks, post: 437286, member: 1108 wrote: That raised my eyebrows a bit so I looked it up. Here's the salient code:
(b) Conflict of Interest:
[INDENT](1) If a licensee provides professional services for two or more clients on a project or related projects, the licensee shall disclose in writing to those clients and property owners or their authorized representatives his or her relationship to those clients.[/INDENT]
So that settles it, there are not related projects, therefore there is no requirement to inform the client. However, I agree that it would probably be a good idea to tell the client that you've done a lot of work for his neighbor, just in case at some point the excrement hits the propulsion device.
It would be unethical if you charge your new client a discounted fee based solely or in part on data gathered while under contract with the former client.
Murphy, post: 437291, member: 9787 wrote: It would be unethical if you charge your new client a discounted fee based solely or in part on data gathered while under contract with the former client.
To be clear, do you mean charging the new client a discounted fee while you are under contract with the other client, or do you mean charging the new client a discounted fee using data collected for the former client?