In a thread below my good friend David (Dave) Ingram points out that he does not use electronic authentication because he wants the client to have an original signature on the document. (If I paraphrased your meaning incorrectly please correct me Dave.)
[msg=285127]See thread here.[/msg]
I hear what you are saying but permit me to ask a follow up question without taking the previous thread on a far out rabbit hunt.
Ever had a client change your work then scan the altered document that still had your original signature? I have not experienced that personally; but, I have known and seen others who did.
If a client of mine prints my electronically signed map, makes changes and then scans, the document is no longer signed.
My point being if you are concerned about security, seems to me the better option is to use electronic signatures than to not.
Larry P
Larry-
Have a read:
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onsc/doc/2009/2009canlii65373/2009canlii65373.html
Cheers,
Derek
I had an Architect change a setback on my survey to accommodate his design. I had shown a more restrictive front setback per the covenants and he changed it to a zoning setback. I refused to stake the house for my builder client and after a bunch of back and forth, the setback I showed held up. Many $$ in new plans later, we got it done.
I now require that a scan (.PDF) of my original, signed survey be included in any plans prepared from my survey.
Seems to have worked pretty well so far.
See you in Morganton Larry.
> See you in Morganton Larry.
It should be a good day. Looking forward to seeing the crowd and enjoying a good day.
Larry P
> If a client of mine prints my electronically signed map, makes changes and then scans, the document is no longer signed.
Once the information is out, it is free to travel. Things can be changed, regardless of the types of signatures. A signature is not much of a protection.
Interesting. Thanks for posting that case. The judge really dropped the hammer on them for messing with a survey plat in order to build a pond (get permitted) and trespassing on the adjoiners land.
Yes, after preparing a site plan, portions of which were in the flood plane, the client decided to do a cut and paste job on printed copies, moving the building and other features. I only found out when I happened to be at MSD and saw a copy of "my" document laying on the desktop of the reviewer. I immediately told the reviewer that the plan had been altered and that he needed to deny the work.
When the client was advised of this, he was rather angry but had no other option but to yet continue my services to complete the design and submittal (since he had so much money already spent on design phase services). Yes, I made him prepay the work for the second phase in the form of a retainer.
And, to further aggravate the situation, when I completed the revised drawings, I printed my seal with a red watermark stating that any copies of the drawing without the red watermark are not valid for permitting and approval.
Yes the digital age makes this easier. Many years ago, another company took a signed blue line and made a wash off sepia. They added a sewer as-built to the plat and turned it in with by boss's certification.The point is that no proceedure is completely safe from the acts of unscrupulous people. The best defense is to always keep a certified copy of each revision and a strict policy of never releasing a revised plat without a revision date. As more client expect digital deliveries, an electronic signature with a verifiable watermark makes the most sense.
Yes I have and because of it about 10 years ago started emboss sealing all the plats that leave the office.
The plat also has the statement "This plat is valid only if it contains my PLS embossed seal."
I haven't heard of a way to fake an embossed seal.
> I haven't heard of a way to fake an embossed seal.
Can't you just order those off the internet?
