@aliquot I find your analogy to be flawed again.?ÿ How about an example that actually applies to the OP's question of working for their self in a real estate transaction in which they are the buyer.
Is a lawyer allowed to represent him/her self in a real estate transaction??ÿ Yes in most states.?ÿ In fact, they can often easily get a broker license by filling out paperwork to do so and skipping the working under a licensed Real Estate Broker; thereby saving or getting a part of the commission of the sale.
Is a lawyer allowed to represent both parties in a real estate transaction? Yes in many states.?ÿ In these cases, they are required to disclose to both parties the potential conflict of interest and make sure that everyone understands that they are to remove themselves from representing either party should the potential conflict of interest become something that can not be dealt with in an impartial manner.?ÿ Leaving it up to their professional judgement.?ÿ While not required, it is strongly recommended that they use a standard form for disclosure signed by interested parties.
Where would a lawyer find out if these things are allowed??ÿ By looking to their code of professional ethics and/or by reviewing an explanatory opinion as put out by the bar for their state.
I think you may have much reduced vision of our role. A real-estate transaction is a financial exchange. A realtors job is to help their client with the transaction. They have no responsibility to anyone else. Representing yourself in a realty transaction doesn't create any ethical problems, because you are taking in a role that is ment to be an advocate for yourself.
A realtor representing the buyer and seller does present some issues, and is actually not approved in many places, but is much more ameneniable to disclosure as a solution, since the work of the realtor is easily analyzed in real time. (I.e. are the conditions of sale satisfactory).
The other huge difference, is that a realtor only gets paid if their customer is happy with the product. We don't await payments until we produce a boundary determination satisfactory to our client.?ÿ
@aliquot Then Ive been misleading everyone in telling them that if they don??t agree with findings of my survey, that they are well within their rights to hire their own surveyor for a second opinion and, I will maintain an open mind to something that I might have missed. I can think of no faster nor efficient way to lose my license than to intentionally misrepresent my findings to the public, to my own personal ends. If as a profession we cannot be relied upon to remain impartial, then we have no right to call ourselves professionals. Do you hear Professional attorney? How about Professional Doctor. There is an implied trust. What I hear you saying is that we can??t be trusted to use good judgment.
Oklahoma Society of Land Surveyors Code of Ethics:
.... a Professional Surveyor should develop and communicate a professional analysis and opinion without bias or personal interest .....?ÿ
Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon Code of Ethics:
..... I will act in professional matters for each employers or client as faithful agents or trustess, and shall avoid conflicts of interest ...
Land Surveyors Association of Washington Code of Ethics:
..... Professional Land Surveyors shall act in a professional matters for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees, and shall avoid conflicts of interest .....
?ÿ
Consistent messaging. Those are the three I'm familiar with. I'm guessing that the other 47 can be filled in by others. Nevertheless, I'm sure all of us have someone we can call on to review and sign off on a survey of our own properties, and for whom we would reciprocate.?ÿ
Oklahoma Society of Land Surveyors Code of Ethics:
.... a Professional Surveyor should develop and communicate a professional analysis and opinion without bias or personal interest .....?ÿ
Professional Land Surveyors of Oregon Code of Ethics:
..... I will act in professional matters for each employers or client as faithful agents or trustess, and shall avoid conflicts of interest ...
Land Surveyors Association of Washington Code of Ethics:
..... Professional Land Surveyors shall act in a professional matters for each employer or client as faithful agents or trustees, and shall avoid conflicts of interest .....
?ÿ
Consistent messaging. Those are the three I'm familiar with. I'm guessing that the other 47 can be filled in by others. Nevertheless, I'm sure all of us have someone we can call on to review and sign off on a survey of our own properties, and for whom we would reciprocate.?ÿ
OK seems clearest here. Is something that is professionaly unethical in one state ethical in another state, just because the code doesn't mention it??ÿ WA and OR will still have us talking in circles, because some think land surveyors are immune to greed, and dishonesty and don't see a conflict on interest in surveying their own boundary.
Alaska administrative code:?ÿ
"A registrant shall attempt to avoid all conflicts of interst..."
And NSPS Canon #4:?ÿ
A Professional Surveyor should develop and communicate a professional analysis and opinion without bias or personal interest.
@aliquot Then Ive been misleading everyone in telling them that if they don??t agree with findings of my survey, that they are well within their rights to hire their own surveyor for a second opinion and, I will maintain an open mind to something that I might have missed. I can think of no faster nor efficient way to lose my license than to intentionally misrepresent my findings to the public, to my own personal ends. If as a profession we cannot be relied upon to remain impartial, then we have no right to call ourselves professionals. Do you hear Professional attorney? How about Professional Doctor. There is an implied trust. What I hear you saying is that we can??t be trusted to use good judgment.
I don't follow. How does what I said conflict with a client having the right to a second opinion? Everyone is within their rights to ask for a second opinion on a judges verdict too (unless the verdict is from Supreme Court).?ÿ
Your boundary survey has value because your clients expect to be able to rely on it. Of course, they should be aware that there are exceptions, but they would have little interest in hiring you if those exceptions were not rare.?ÿ
You do have an interesting?ÿ point about "proffesional" attorneys and doctors, that would be a good discussion, but don't see the relevance to the discussion?ÿ
WA and OR will still have us talking in circles ...
If you get to parsing the words of a Code of Ethics statement you have missed the point.
Judges decide cases that impact the public, as their rulings become part of the body of case law and impact individuals who were not involved in that particular trial.
Licensed surveyors make professional judgments that impact the public, as their decisions impact common boundary lines of individuals (both current and future) who own adjacent properties, who are also not involved in the rendering of professional services.
?ÿ
Disclosure of a potential professional conflict of interest, whether voluntary or mandatory, is done in order to inform parties who have (a) the ability to put a stop to the whole thing, and (b) the professional and/or technical knowledge to discern whether it would be a good idea to put a stop to the whole thing.
That might be a board of directors, an internal ethics board, an individual supervisor, or an Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) or equivalent.
?ÿ
If a licensed surveyor "discloses" to a seller that they will be surveying their own land, that seller not only cannot speak for the other adjoining landowners that may be affected, but they also cannot competently understand or judge whether that might be a problem, or what the problem might be.
Some have said upthread that they would proceed if there were no known problems with the property, but the bottom line is that the other party doesn't know enough about what we do to make the call.
?ÿ
Unlike licensed surveyors, attorneys are advocates for their clients. That's the real service that they provide, and if an attorney is "working both sides of the street", that disclosure is easily evaluated in the sense that either of those clients can make a call on whether they are comfortable with this guy/gal advocating for the party on the other side of the table.
Realtors are also advocates for their clients - unlike land surveyors - and their only real obligation to the public is to not discriminate against their clients. If someone wants to enter into a deal with a realtor, the consequences of the realtor advocating for himself or herself rarely impacts the public in the same way that a surveyor giving into a conflict of interest.
?ÿ
It may seem like splitting hairs to some, but these details matter.
WA and OR will still have us talking in circles ...
If you get to parsing the words of a Code of Ethics statement you have missed the point.
Yep! I would go even further, if you use the code of ethics as a guide to good behavior you've missed the point of being a proffesional. The code is there for keeping the bottom of the barrel from falling out the bottom.
Even good surveyors can approach the bottom occasionally through no fault of their own, due to a chain of events outside their control, but they shouldn't reach the point of parsing thier meaning through their own intentional actions.?ÿ
Judges decide cases that impact the public, as their rulings become part of the body of case law
Only at the appellate level.?ÿ District court rulings are not precedent for other judges.
@bill93?ÿ
Very true. A judge presiding over a case in district court where he himself is the plaintiff would still be a problem.
I think you may have much reduced vision of our role. A real-estate transaction is a financial exchange. A realtors job is to help their client with the transaction. They have no responsibility to anyone else.
You conveniently changed what I stated because it fits more neatly into your opinion.?ÿ The only mention of realtor was pointing out that a lawyer doesn't even have to jump through the same process to get a broker license.?ÿ The entirety of the rest of the post addressed a lawyer and their representation of two sides when they are supposed to hold the interest of their client.
You are clearly underestimating the role of the lawyer in what you have for some odd reason tried to minimize to only an exchange of goods for money.?ÿ The attorney has much more potential conflict of interest in terms of title opinion and knowledge of both parties financial situations.
There is some very interesting reading on the matter easily available online.?ÿ Very thought provoking case concerning an attorney who fully disclosed to the two parties when he represented them as buyer and seller, but because of timing issues with contracting between buyer 1 and another buyer 2 (purchasing from buyer 1 after the first closing) and not disclosing to the original sellers he ended up in trouble.?ÿ Whereas if he had disclosed the other deal to the original sellers he would not have violated the ethical issue of disclosure.
Alaska administrative code:?ÿ
"A registrant shall attempt to avoid all conflicts of interst..."
How about putting the full text out there instead of being so selective.
"shall attempt to avoid all conflicts of interest with his or her employer or client, but, if some conflict is unavoidable a registrant shall promptly inform his or her employer or client of the registrant's business association, interests, or circumstances that could influence the registrant's judgement or the quality of the registrant's service to the employer or client."
If you wanted to argue the phrase "...if some conflict is unavoidable..." and what unavoidable would mean, that would certainly be a better discussion than selecting only the first 1/4 of the statute to try to support your opinion.
This judges adjudicating their own case DOES NOT WORK because it is already specifically addressed; surprisingly enough in writing as a law which apparently is not sufficient for some folks to rely on.
One example from US Code - "(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:?ÿ (5) He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person: (i)?ÿ Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;"
Why would a fully judicial being such as a judge need to be specifically told that point??ÿ Surely they have a least as much wisdom for judgement as surveyors and shouldn't need that to be specifically written out.?ÿ For exactly the reason Bill already stated - the power and authority of that position very clearly requires that be the case.?ÿ If a fully judicial person (a judge) is specifically told in writing that point, why is it not included and so clearly stated for a "quasi-judicial" profession's written laws/rules??ÿ Probably not because the people that develop these requirements don't enjoy writing new requirements.?ÿ More likely because we are expected (just like a lawyer) to be able to practice a level of professionalism to determine when disclosure is sufficient and when stepping away is required.
After presenting a course on this topic probably 30 times by now, the discussion is very evenly split.?ÿ When I first started presenting the course, I was much more of the opinion - absolutely don't do it.?ÿ But that opinion is solely an opinion which I've not seen supported by any specific law.?ÿ And given the even divide I've witnessed in in-person discussion, I very much doubt it will be resolved to a definitive yes or no answer on a message board.
In looking back at the respondents that stated they have done their own surveying, I did not see a single person that I would consider to be a "bottom of the barrel" surveyor (either inadvertently or on purpose).?ÿ As a matter of fact, they were folks who I have learned from on this board and value their?ÿ input.
?ÿ
.... How about putting the full text out there instead of being so selective....
What is written in statute is quite different from ethics.?ÿ It may not be illegal to survey property that you have a personal interest in, but it is unethical.?ÿ?ÿ
Alaska administrative code:?ÿ
"A registrant shall attempt to avoid all conflicts of interst..."
How about putting the full text out there instead of being so selective.
"shall attempt to avoid all conflicts of interest with his or her employer or client, but, if some conflict is unavoidable a registrant shall promptly inform his or her employer or client of the registrant's business association, interests, or circumstances that could influence the registrant's judgement or the quality of the registrant's service to the employer or client."
If you wanted to argue the phrase "...if some conflict is unavoidable..." and what unavoidable would mean, that would certainly be a better discussion than selecting only the first 1/4 of the statute to try to support your opinion.
What rational interpretation of "unavoidable" would include deciding to survey your own boundary?
@jon-payne this conversation is getting difficult. You are ignoring the crux of my argument against comparing us to attorneys. Attorneys are hired to be advocates of their client. While there may be some room for client advocacy in some areas of proffesional land surveyor's practice, I hope we all can agree that it doesn't belong in a boundary determination.
Your example of an attorney representing both sides doesn't translate. A better example would be an attorney representing himself, and his opponent in a legal conflict.?ÿ
I don't see any problem doing a topo survey, or construction layout for yourself. We need to take ?ÿour quasi-judicial function when it comes to boundary location seriously.?ÿ
?ÿ
This judges adjudicating their own case DOES NOT WORK because it is already specifically addressed; surprisingly enough in writing as a law which apparently is not sufficient for some folks to rely on.
One example from US Code - "(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:?ÿ (5) He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person: (i)?ÿ Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;"
Why would a fully judicial being such as a judge need to be specifically told that point??ÿ Surely they have a least as much wisdom for judgement as surveyors and shouldn't need that to be specifically written out.?ÿ For exactly the reason Bill already stated - the power and authority of that position very clearly requires that be the case.?ÿ If a fully judicial person (a judge) is specifically told in writing that point, why is it not included and so clearly stated for a "quasi-judicial" profession's written laws/rules??ÿ Probably not because the people that develop these requirements don't enjoy writing new requirements.?ÿ More likely because we are expected (just like a lawyer) to be able to practice a level of professionalism to determine when disclosure is sufficient and when stepping away is required.
After presenting a course on this topic probably 30 times by now, the discussion is very evenly split.?ÿ When I first started presenting the course, I was much more of the opinion - absolutely don't do it.?ÿ But that opinion is solely an opinion which I've not seen supported by any specific law.?ÿ And given the even divide I've witnessed in in-person discussion, I very much doubt it will be resolved to a definitive yes or no answer on a message board.
In looking back at the respondents that stated they have done their own surveying, I did not see a single person that I would consider to be a "bottom of the barrel" surveyor (either inadvertently or on purpose).?ÿ As a matter of fact, they were folks who I have learned from on this board and value their?ÿ input.
?ÿ
There were a number of examples in this thread of a "law" that supports the opinion. I think it's hard to come up with a clearer conflict of interest for a surveyor than surveying their own property... well I suppose accepting a bribe would be.
I don't see any problem doing a topo survey, or construction layout for yourself. We need to take ?ÿour quasi-judicial function when it comes to boundary location seriously.?ÿ
?ÿ
I see that as the crux of the issue. The tendency to generalize, paint everything black and white whereas with most survey related issues, it depends. Do I want others to perceive a survey of my property as self serving? Obviously not. As a licensed surveyor, am I precluded from relying on survey monuments set by others to aid in performing a survey entirely within the bounds of my own property for my personal benefit? Where is the conflict? If the optics could potentially throw my determination on a boundary into doubt, there is clear reason to avoid such a situation.
What is written in statute is quite different from ethics.?ÿ It may not be illegal to survey property that you have a personal interest in, but it is unethical.
This is really where the disconnect occurs - the notion that if it's not specifically proscribed by law then it is totally OK. But there's not, nor will there ever be, a perfect comprehensive list of every single situation that someone could conceivably find themselves in.
Also, some seem to interpret the "disclose and attempt to avoid" clause to mean "if I disclose, the work now becomes ethical and I don't have to avoid it any more".
But the "attempt" part is separate from the "disclose" part. You should only disclose if you have already attempted to avoid the work, but were unable to. Unable as in, you had no other choice, or the other choices presented an undue burden. I think this was touched on upthread, but it's remarkably easy to avoid surveying property you have a personal interest in - hire a surveyor.
We complain all the time about folks who don't want to hire a surveyor because they're too cheap, or bitch about landowners using tax maps, and we love to say "GIS means Get It Surveyed!". If we're going to take the stance that it's not a burden for them to hire a surveyor, how is it a burden for us to do the same?
Especially when it lets us actually avoid a potential conflict of interest. It's a very low bar to clear.
