@jph?ÿ I agree and the limitations on time are a good thing. The idea that liability only extends to the individual paying for the survey is what I don't agree with. If the product is flawed in a negligent manner and causes damages, the negligent party should be liable regardless of who suffered the damages. Yes, we all make mistakes, and hopefully they are innocent ones and we don't have to bear severe consequences. Professional liability insurance exists for a reason, we all should have it, and that along with our diligence in carrying out our work, should allow us to not live in fear.
This seems to be a commonly repeated myth on this site.?ÿ Every other profession can be held liable for damages or third parties. For Texas engineers in particular see USA Walnut Creek, DST v. Terracon Consultants, Inc., 2015 app LEXIS 1806. and the cases it cites.?ÿ Engineers' liability extends to future owners, neighbours and the public. A contractual relationship with your client doesn't protect you from harm done to others by your professional negligence, regardless of your profession.?ÿ
Asking a new owner to pay for the same product again isn't going to win our profession any boosters. Of course we need to be clear that our surveys are a snapshot in time, and shouldn't be used to represent current conditions without some investigation.?ÿ
What percentage of retired surveyors keep paying for professional liability insurance up through their date of death??ÿ Do the job right or don't do it at all.?ÿ Prepare for the worst, because it can happen.
What percentage of retired surveyors keep paying for professional liability insurance up through their date of death?
My point exactly.?ÿ It's an undue burden.?ÿ
Sure, we're all trying to do things right, but it's in our best interest to limit our liability as much as possible.?ÿ I can't imagine members of other professions arguing against this.?ÿ Why are we?
What percentage of retired surveyors keep paying for professional liability insurance up through their date of death??ÿ
The risk drops off as time passes, even before a statutory limit, so a retiree is probably overpaying.
The insurance should be structured to cover work done during the policy period, and cover that work until the statute of limitations runs out.
You shouldn't have to buy insurance when you aren't working. If structured this way, it might be a little more expensive at the time, but you could be done with it.
The idea that surveyors monument their mistakes can be argued as true, but they don't monument their liability forever.?ÿ
The OP's example looks, on the face of it, to be beyond the limit. But you can get sued or can sue even if it's too late.
A good attorney will advise you to drop it, a bad one will push it, lose and collect the fees.?ÿ?ÿ
Let's face it, when establishing long lost/obliterated boundaries we're liable for eternity. Discovery can occur years later, promulgating litigation.?ÿ Surveying insurance I've purchased has always involved limited construction surveying where parties try to transfer risk to subcontractors, a requirement for bidding.?ÿ Cruel but that's how it works.
So when doing pure boundary work do it with ordinary care concerning the profession; you cannot be busted for not being perfect, but you can be busted for egregiously substandard work.?ÿ Same as automobile repair, medical professionals, attorneys,?ÿ actually all "professions".
So I'm not a fan of statutes of limitations concerning boundary surveys; parties could discover your substandard work has harmed them decades later and you should be culpable.?ÿ Best defense is to be dead upon discovery, hard to get blood out of a turnip.?ÿ While practicing, ensure your analysis and map recordations meet the highest standards and you'll be essentially sue-proof.?ÿ Avoid clients who want a survey cheaply where you can't possibly do the job properly at the agreed price.
But that's just me;?ÿ carry on if your business is drive by shootings & lowball surveys with high profit margins; sooner or later you'll get popped in court and your business will go bankrupt.
Your questions are premature.?ÿ You have a layperson "saying" where they think the boundary is.?ÿ Versus, a surveyors opinion.?ÿ Surveyors opinion wins.
If you had 2 differing surveyors opinions, and neither would agree with the other, then you would need an opinion from the court.?ÿ If you didn't like that opinion you might be able to appeal and get a different one again.?ÿ At the end of it all the court would disagree with one of the surveyors.?ÿ But that doesn't mean said surveyor is liable for anything.
Just because the surveyor used a tax map as part of the research doesn't mean that's all the research that was performed.?ÿ In addition, the court might agree with the one who did less research.?ÿ Merely doing more research doesn't always mean the court will agree.
But yeah, if the statute of limitations has not run, and if you had a court decision against the surveyor, and then if you could prove negligence/malpractice (very difficult), then yes you could recover a couple thousand dollars to move the fence.?ÿ
Did one once where I disagreed with the previous surveyor and said a well was placed on the wrong lot.?ÿ My client was initially willing to convey the area at a small fee, but other side was not nice, so became a matter of principle.?ÿ Each side spent 10's of thousands on attorney fees, well had to be shut down and a new one dug costing 15k per, plus loser had to hire me to survey a lot next door and buy it to have a spot for the new well.?ÿ Brought about a divorce for the "winning" side.?ÿ My initial fee was about 2500. I had given similar estimate to loser and they opted for 600 survey, which set it all in motion.?ÿ Losing surveyor was not found negligent, court simply didn't agree with them.
Moral of the story; it's complicated and people involved are not necessarily out to get you.?ÿ Ask not whom you can blame but rather how you can most amicably and economically solve the problem.?ÿ If you have actual evidence of misconduct by the surveyor, file a complaint with the board of registration. Let them handle it and focus on your problem.?ÿ If the surveyor is truly a bad actor others will also be complaining and they will eventually be removed from practice.?ÿ If it is a matter of principle and you have the funds go for it, but realize you will be harming your neighbor in the process as well (of course that's usually why these end up in court, to use the hammer of the law against a neighbor).
In your example there's many reasons why the map you mention might be held to be correct by a court.
parties could discover your substandard work has harmed them decades later and you should be culpable.?ÿ Best defense is to be dead upon discovery
Really??ÿ This is not something I wish to have hanging over my head forever.?ÿ If that's what we're in for, then I would never suggest this profession for anyone.?ÿ Underpaid, undervalued, with unlimited liability, no thanks.
It's like some sort of bizarre pride some of you have here.?ÿ And spare me the holier than thou bit about not making any mistakes, please.
Same sort of story here with adjoiners fighting over principle rather than dollars or common sense.?ÿ One side hired me.?ÿ When the court heard that side (the one the small town judge disliked the most) had hired a surveyor the court then hired one to give an "unbiased" opinion.?ÿ I found original bars in several places but absolutely nothing at one section corner no matter what theory I might use to find it.?ÿ Then the "court" surveyor did his thing.?ÿ Guess what.?ÿ He found a brand new, so shiny you could see your reflection in the end of it, bar three inches up in a location I had scoured thoroughly?ÿ with no record suggesting a bar had ever been set there.?ÿ That one bar skewed the entire survey enough to put the disputed line EXACTLY where the other side of the fight thought it should be.?ÿ After a couple days of hearings the judge decided the surveyor he hired had to be correct because he had hired him and said as much on the record.?ÿ There was no attempt by anyone to accuse me of wrong doing in any form.
The question from the OP is basically is this situation one where the new owner can go after the 2009 surveyor for damages, also can the survey be fixed. This is more for a Texas attorney to answer concerning the surveyor's liability. But the survey can be disputed, unless Texas is way different than other states.?ÿ
Unlimited liability in perpetuity is typically not put upon other professionals. Washington state's statute of limitations is six years for "design professionals", and specifically includes licensed land surveyors.
The idea that we should be liable forever to any and all agents is just laughable on its face. At some point, whatever errors might have been committed, the current state of affairs has been accepted by all affected parties for a substantial period of time; any attempt to turn the clock back to "fix" things is going to do more damage. (Consider subdivision blocks that are found too short in length and the "solution" of proration would force every single lot owner to relocate their homes and fences, despite having been there for a couple decades. The surveying solution does not always overlap with the equitable solution as determined by a court.)
It's a tough sell to a judge to say that one was injured by a surveyor's actions ten years ago, before they ever owned the land. Not to mention that at some point we have to expect a buyer to perform his or her due diligence, which would include securing a survey which might disclose issues with the property.
Now, all that being said, it's not a difficult task to establish a defensible boundary decision/opinion when the standard is "preponderance of evidence". As others pointed out upthread, just because a judge or court-appointed surveyor does not agree with your opinion, it doesn't automatically mean you are going to be held negligent or responsible for damages.
Proving those damages gets harder and harder as time goes on, which was the original reason (going all the way back to ancient Greece) that statutes of repose were created.
@holy-cow Agreed0 One issue is that when CRS4U has survyed the property I must automatically assume it was conducted incorrectly and go to the previous survey, which is not a big deal because I know about them and know not to rely on their surveys.?ÿ The trouble comes in when someone who is not familar with CRS4U follows them up and holds their survey without any additional research/investigation and ends up perpetuating the inaccuracies.
@duane-frymire?ÿ It isn't quite just a layperson "saying" where they think the boundary is.?ÿ To try to keep my original post as consise as possible, I did not give the background on the adjoining property where the building is.?ÿ For the adjoining property, she had it surveyed when she bought it in 2007 and that surveyor located and held the corner monuments called for in the previous survey that was conducted in the 80s.?ÿ In the 2007 survey, they surveyor noted the location of the building in relation to the boundary lines and also noted the alley along with the visible evidence of municipal utilities locted within the alley. All of this being properly filed of record at the courthouse.?ÿ When the fence stirred up the situation, the adjoining landowner hired us to verify her survey (previous surveyor had died of Pancreatic Cancer).?ÿ We went to the field and found all monuments called for by her previous surveyor and none of the three monuments claimed to be "set" by CRS4U, only her building corner that he had called for.?ÿ When we did not find his monuments and could not locate any transfer of title of the alley from the city I called CRS4U and met with him.?ÿ He told ME, that he based his dimensions on the tax map that his client had provided him with.?ÿ I asked him if he had pulled the deeds for the property and how he justified including the alley, to which he said he "had a document with dimensions. That and common sense was all that was needed."?ÿ Like you said though, who is to say that a court would find him neglegent even if the statue of limitaions had not already ran.?ÿ It will be curious to see what happens if the city ever needs to access the alley for line maintence/repair.?ÿ The adjoining landowner is considering contacting the board, but who knows if she will follow through.?ÿ?ÿ
Like you had alluded to in your post, the most headstrong, vicious disagreements & lawsuits are over very small pieces of land. I conduct every one of my surveys as though each of the adjoiners is going to try to file a complaint, if I overlook something, it will not be because of lack of trying.?ÿ
parties could discover your substandard work has harmed them decades later and you should be culpable.?ÿ Best defense is to be dead upon discovery
Really??ÿ This is not something I wish to have hanging over my head forever.?ÿ If that's what we're in for, then I would never suggest this profession for anyone.?ÿ Underpaid, undervalued, with unlimited liability, no thanks.
It's like some sort of bizarre pride some of you have here.?ÿ And spare me the holier than thou bit about not making any mistakes, please.
Sorry I came across that way.?ÿ I've made mistakes, one in particular cost my company $20,000, & other less serious ones.?ÿ Part of my post reads:
"So when doing pure boundary work do it with ordinary care concerning the profession; you cannot be busted for not being perfect, but you can be busted for egregiously substandard work.?ÿ Same as automobile repair, medical professionals, attorneys,?ÿ actually all "professions".
So I'm not a fan of statutes of limitations concerning boundary surveys; [?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ .?ÿ ]"
After some poking around, I modify my statement(s) after learning all(?) States starting around 1980 have instituted Statutes of Repose concerning Land Surveyor's culpability which commences at the substantial completion of the work, as opposed to Statutes of Limitation which commence upon the discovery of the damage, which could be decades later in the case of Land Surveyor's work.?ÿ The policy behind a statute of repose is that the traditional statute of limitations subjects the surveyor to an unreasonable potential liability. A fixed period of time from the ultimate discovery of an error in a survey ?? plus, let??s say three years ?? could be a very long time indeed.?ÿ So I'm not a fan of statutes?ÿof?ÿlimitation because they essentially extend liability forever for Land Surveyors, for the opposite reason I was implying in my post.?ÿ I am a fan of Statutes of Repose which seems reasonable concerning protection from stale lawsuits filed decades later.
Here's a good read concerning our situation:?ÿ Limitation vs. Repose
PLSSia is where this can really put the surveyor in a pickle.?ÿ You aren't surveying for one person but everyone in the adjoining sections as well.?ÿ Trying to change one thing may be playing with 50 properties, not just the one where your paycheck will be derived.
Doctors bury their mistakes; lawyers send theirs to jail; engineers blame you for not catching it; Surveyors monument theirs for everyone to see...
@holy-cow Yeah, I dealt with something similar. Found an old weathered X chiseled on a stone that fit all the other evidence and was obviously done more than 50 years ago at the time of original survey.?ÿ In pre court hearings surveyor that didn't find it says he just put it there and was temporary point.?ÿ Old fart never chiseled on a rock in his life, I know I worked for him a number of years.?ÿ But they settled during the hearing so he never actually had to decide whether or not to commit perjury:)
@kkw_archer Ah, well that actually is negligence per se in just about any jurisdiction.?ÿ Should be reported to the board even if current landowner will not get any money out of it.
