My hope is to gain a better understanding of the legal aspect of these requests... Scenario:?ÿ I completed a boundary survey 8 years ago for private client who was purchasing a parcel of land. At the time of the survey, I was asked to add certification to purchaser, title insurance company and bank. This was included in the cost of the survey. Fast forward to now, attorney for client requests certification to two new parties, because the client (who I conducted the survey for) is now selling. But of course, they are in a HUGE hurry and of course, they have no intention of paying for an updated survey, they "simply need additional certifications". I charge for these additional certifications (per party) and this year have started requiring payment before these additional certifications are released. Now client believes i "didn't do my job correctly" and the client considers it "blackmail" that I will not extend my liability to additional parties without being compensated for it.?ÿ
This is turning out to he more of a bitch session, but thanks all. Just would like to hear any constructive feedback. Thanks in advance.?ÿ
Larry P gave a pretty good post on this subject in this thread:
https://surveyorconnect.com/community/surveying-geomatics/alta-certification-to-third-parties/
If you decide to add certifications, make it VERY obvious that you are certifying what you found as of that old date and not representing that there is no change. If they want to know the present situation, that's a new survey.
As First Lady Nancy Reagan said in 1986: Just say NO!
Do not be bullied.?ÿ Your job was over eight years ago.?ÿ So was the job of everyone else involved at that time.?ÿ No one else is going to give them anything for free or same as free compared to full charge for full service.?ÿ Words may sting a little bit but getting hung for extending an eight year-old liability is much more painful.
In the same fashion as the standard practice with ALTA's, either do it all over again for full fee or tell them to find someone else who will give them want they want for essentially no fee.?ÿ Their alleged rush is of no concern whatsoever.
@bill93thanks for this, Bill. I do add that condition in the certification (concerning the date).
Now client believes i "didn't do my job correctly" and the client considers it "blackmail" that I will not extend my liability to additional parties without being compensated for it.?ÿ
I think there's a statute of limitations on fraud or negligence, and it varies from state to state.
@holy-cow Thanks for this. It was like a virtual hug and high five. I'm mainly frustrated with the attorney, who initially requested the certification and then told the (mutual) client that I was the bad guy (gal). "Poor planning on your part does not constitute an emergency on my part." Would it be bad taste to post the letter here that the client sent to me?
@rj-schneider NY is 10 yrs, I'm pretty sure. But I should know that for sure.
No clue here, a quick search of law firm blog shows six years, but extenuating circumstances may make it from the time of contract, or the time of discovery, again, no clue.
Recertified many ALTA surveys a year or five later in repose, when the original parties dissolved/bankrupted and the new owners/bank(s) need a new ALTA map to proceed.?ÿ I'll charge the same as my original fee minus economies (10-20%) because I did the last ALTA on the subject property.?ÿ I'll walk the property to confirm my map is still accurate, do Title report research for any new easements, & BANGO if there's a stink developing, any changes it's a full on new ALTA with a field survey at full price.?ÿ If not I just made a sweet profit by restamping a survey I trust I executed properly.
If it's just a change in owners, mortgages, etc. within a few weeks I'll alter the ALTA to reflect the new owners for a small fee.?ÿ Those developer types shuffle money around so fast it's hard to keep up but it has no effect on boundary issues which I am certifying.
I wonder if it's the same attorney that handled their purchase 8 years ago.?ÿ I wonder how little that attorney might be handling this transaction for.
?ÿ
As said, you have every right to get compensated for your involvement.?ÿ Personally, I won't release an old map without resurveying it.
Licensed Land Surveyor
Finger Lakes Region, Upstate New York
Would it be bad taste to post the letter here that the client sent to me?
No. ?ÿGo ahead and post it. ?ÿJust redact anyone??s names/identities/specific locations to protect the guilty/innocent.
To answer your question about recertification my answer would be a simple NO. You need a new or updated survey. I assume you are in business to make a living not to appease others with "urgent" problems. Like others have said you can bet your sweet "ask" the Attorney isn't giving anything away.
Attorneys are no better than you, remember that, and under no circumstances let yourself become intimidated by them. They go to school to learn how to quickly push hot buttons and intimidate at the same time. It's an art they all have because they know their "stigma" as an Attorney incites worry. Don't fall for it. Tell them explicitly why a new or updated survey is needed, not only for your protection but for the client as well. Tell the Attorney you feel he is remiss in his duties for proposing to use an 8 year old survey. Throw it back in his face that his preposterous suggestion could bankrupt his/your client.
????
?ÿ
Here's the answer, yes, 6 yrs:
Under New York law, the general statute of limitations applicable to contractual dispute is six years. C.P.L.R. §3211(a)(5). The cause of action accrues, and the statute of limitations begins to run, “at the time of the breach.” Ely-Cruikshank Co. v. Bank of Montreal, 81 N.Y.2d 399, 402 (1993). An exception to this rule exists, however, where a contract imposes a duty of “continuing performance over a period of time.” Where such a continuing duty is imposed, “each successive breach may begin the statute of limitations running anew.” Guilbert v. Gardner, 480 F.3d 140, 150 (2d Cir. 2007) (applying Bulova Watch v. Celotex, 46 N.Y.2d 606 (1979)).
@flga I have learned my lesson here. Thank you so much for this valuable comment. I am writing a letter now, which also includes "effective immediately" standard operating procedures to the attorney.
PS Love the chimp!
If this was a cartoon someone would get their neck wrung about forty times before releasing it so that it could go backwards another forty times.
Whiners. The world is full of whiners. People who believe they can get something for nothing simply because that is what they are willing to pay.
WOW! Standards YOU are not following?? I'd inform the client that you are looking out for THEIR interests as well.
Andy
@mike-marks that seems like a well thought out response. It protects you and the buyers. well done.
My impression of the letter is that the client is the like the majority of people, clueless as to the function of a land surveyor.?ÿ If I had to guess, I??d say the letter was simply a parroting of what the attorney told him in their last conversation.?ÿ
Even though it was a threatening and somewhat rude letter, I would explain to the client that it is because of the standards of the practice of surveying that you cannot ethically rubber stamp a project.?ÿ You are required by law to inspect against encroachments, locate easements, and investigate the chain of title prior to certifying any documents.?ÿ Eight years is a long time and your ??Higher Up(s)? would not approve of a fraudulent use of your credentials.?ÿ Your seal has value because it implies that you have thoroughly reviewed the document and underlying data it represents.?ÿ
The first draft of my response letter would likely include some harsh words about the attorney and stern words to the client.?ÿ The second draft would see them removed.?ÿ It may be a lost cause with this client, but you should still act like a true professional and avoid accusations, insinuations, and general pettiness. Good luck.
Is it something about title law that brings out the worst in attorneys??ÿ I??ve met more than a few lawyers in other areas of the law that were decent but I??ve yet to interact with a title attorney that I??d want to invite to lunch.
Just, wow! The value is evident, merely in the request for the certification.
These additional parties, late to the party by 8 years, obviously want to rely on your work.
Just another day in paradise!
Rick