Lets say "hypothetically" you were hired to stake a parcel on a nice lake nearby. After researching the parcel description and neighboring parcels, you discover some interesting facts:
- The parcel to the South is the North 100 feet of Gov't. Lot 2 for as far back as you looked.
- The South line of subject parcel starts at the NW corner of GL 2, but then goes North 5 feet into GL 1 to POB and runs along a very well monumented line (6 conc. mons in all) that stays 5 feet north and parallel of the common Gov't. Lot line all the way to the lake.
- There is a 1973 survey that shows subject parcel and the monumented line 5 feet North of GL Line.
- Subject parcel is occupying to the monuments, Parcel to South has no clear occupation line.
- So staking the parcel is easy, but there is a 5 foot gap lake parcel.
Question is, do you:
A. Tell client and offer to do additional research and help them get title to it. Most likely at one time the 5 feet was owned by the same party as the clients parcel.
B. Tell both parties. (They are not fighting over the line, but are not friendly over the line either).
C. Tell neither and try to get title to it for my own lake access.
D. Do nothing.
E. Other, please state what...
A
Sounds to me as though the party who had your client's tract created intended to keep that strip of ground.
I would mention what I found, but, would not try to tell the client what he should do about it unless he began to ask for advice.
I agree with cow. Is there value in that 5' strip as lake access?
Dude,
You have GOT to mow your front yard!
There is a 5 foot wide remainder tract of land between the parcels as described in the deed documents of the parcels located within GL 1 and 2. Clearly not an oversight. That 5 foot wide strip belongs to someone and it ain,t the surveyor, his client or the owner to the South. Further research may determining the owner and the whys or it may only reveal that it has fallen through the cracks of the taxing body because no taxes have been payed for years. If no tax's have been payed, the taxing body is charged with offering that strip at auction to the highest bidder in order to recover for the public the lost tax revenues and to get it back in the tax roles. What would I do, show it as a legally created adjoining unit of land that is 5 foot wide.
jud
You definitely need to check on the possibility that an earlier grantor of the north parcel owned other adjacent land and created the 5-ft strip for his own lake access.
Even if the strip wasn't specifically granted to later buyers of that hypothetical adjacent parcel, might the strip be interpreted as intended to go with it?
A decision a surveyor is not authorized to make. If the record indicts that, that is the case or attaching it to the larger piece would be the logical thing to do, do so using a clear title action of some sort, so the act has a legal paper trail to follow which would protect against a future clouded title issue.
jud
Dude,@>Jack
Would I be the "dude" you're referring to, as in mow my front yard? Well I am going to try and do that tomorrow. A couple of cracked ribs slowed me up this week. Mow it, move the boat over and rig if for sale... but wait a minute, you can't see my yard from Hooostun. You spying on me? 🙂
Dtp
The real question to answer is how to get paid for the additional research that the client didn't ask for and doesn't think thy "need."
Never have been able to bill every hour and price myself out of the market anyway. It is the same clients along with their recommendations that keep most of us in the black.
Doing a little extra won't hurt you, but in this case it would be your obligation to research that 5 foot strip, it joins the clients lands. Is there harmony in the common boundary or does the record create question? It was also stated that relationship with the neighbor South of the 5 foot strip was a little cool.
jud
if there are no adverse claims or issues with your client and neighbor, in Florida, you could introduce a boundary line agreement and see how that works....
Surveying Question, Not Ethics
Most likely it is walking access to the lake. I have seen lake community maps with such strips all over the place. Question is have you seen the creating map for said lake. There are lake communities where the only map is in possession of the lake association. You have yet to complete your research.
Paul in PA
I always show adjoining deed references (not all current owners, I don't garauntee title).
If it's not clear I would probably show the deed reference of the owner who subdivided the lots along with "now or formerly".
Sure, look further if the client wants to pay. Certainly no obligation to discuss it with anyone other than the client. However, the neighbor might have a deed to it that they intend to file next week or something.
Jud makes a good point, it is missing from the tax role.
I also thought about it being intentional for walking access, but if that's the case it has never been used for such.
Yes, only more research will tell.
Thank You
Scott McLain
