@hpalmer - I look at it like this - I'm not going to risk the decade of work I put into getting my PE or PLS to cut any corners for myself or a client. But I do know that almost monthly I get a remark from a client about them trying to cheapen up a project or skimp on something that is either needed or required (typically for land development)
?ÿ
so I look at it this way - if I am willing to do said engineering for land development or the surveying required to the very best of my ability and know that I'm not willing to risk my hard-earned seals for skimping or cutting corners as it could be viewed poorly by anybody else, then how am I in anyway a worse choice in development than joe-blow developer who is ONLY concerned with the costs and profit margins associated with a project? I look at it as if I am taking the public health, safety and welfare into greater consideration if anything as I would have my hands directly in everything - but hey I can see where others aren't as comfortable too I guess...
Yeah, it really doesn't make sense to flush 10, 20, 30 years of income down the toilet to do what... swindle a 1 foot strip of land from the adjoiner of a property I'm looking to buy??ÿ It's actually the opposite of a conflict of interest, because with me as the client I have the latitude to spare no expense when it comes to doing the job right.
But... we live in a society of cynics I guess, so the only possibility is the undesirable one. ?????ÿ
@bstrand I like what you've pointed out. Surveying your own property does not mean it is in your interest to reach a boundary solution in your favor. Although that is a simple conclusion, there is much more involved and very likely your interest is just the opposite. The value of the 1 foot of the land is very likely a lot less than the value of the professional license that could be lost were you to do something nefarious. It could be argued there is a compelling reason to have a license holder survey his own property.
It could be argued there is a compelling reason to have a license holder survey his own property.
I worked in an area where this was true.?ÿ The best surveyor in the area in the 80's performed a survey of his multigenerational family farm prior to a DOT road widening project.?ÿ Other surveyors in the area weren't all bad or dishonest, but I can vouch that none of them held a candle to him.?ÿ His detailed survey was later referenced by DOT as they completely dropped the ball during their initial surveys.?ÿ His survey of his own property was not only accepted, it was the keystone in which the community stood upon to recover damages.?ÿ His reputation as an honest and thorough PLS was advanced by the survey of his own property.
As has already been pointed out ad nauseam, and as countless codes of ethics for many different professions explicitly say, the issue is a potential conflict of interest. I don't know why this has to be repeated so often.
Codes of ethics are not solely concerned with monetary gain. That's a pretty basic one too.
The younger kids in my Professional Ethics classes really struggled with this one. "But but but, if I'm not going to make money, it's not a conflict of interest!". Despite the fetishization of money and capitalism in the USA, monetary value is not the sole thing upon which actions and individuals can be evaluated, and certainly not in a code of ethics.
It might be in your interest to give more land to the adjoiner, create a cloud on title, or even to muddle up the boundary altogether. There might be a development credit once a commercial lot is below a certain size, or it might be easier to re-zone it once frontage goes below a certain width. It might be in my interest to fudge the numbers and downsize my property to make it less valuable for my personal taxes. All of those things are ethical violations even though they don't necessarily get me money immediately.
When one is in a position to take advantage of their professional license to the detriment of others involved (in our cases, the adjoining landowners) who have neither the expertise to analyze and understand the surveyor's decision, nor the ability to halt the process (because they have no say in whether or not you buy the land, only the seller does), there's clearly a potential for abuse of that license.
But that's the responsibility that comes with the license. We don't get to just say "Well we're super awesome and totally always concerned with the welfare of the public, so we don't have to worry about ethics". That's not how ethics work. In fact, that attitude is a major reason why we have codes of ethics in the first place.
For those arguing "Why would I do that and risk my license?", that's a non-argument. The presumption that one will be found out (or found out before one has gained from violations) doesn't play into ethical codes.
Ethical codes don't play what-ifs. They guide practitioners in order to maintain high standards of practice as well as create and maintain trust of the public. That second one is a big deal, and one that many on this thread are not comprehending.
Sometimes that means stepping away from a job that would otherwise be easy to do. Just because it's easy, and just because we have a high opinion of ourselves, doesn't make it ethical.
Sometimes there is no other option, and that means we have to be tell everyone involved that there is potential conflict of interest, and then step away if others are not comfortable with that.
Sometimes there is no other option, and that means we have to be tell everyone involved that there is potential conflict of interest, and then step away if others are not comfortable with that.
Although "open and notorious" isn't a phrase that traditionally applies in this case, you could make an argument in regards to the spirit of which it represents. You want to claim that you're an impartial professional when surveying property that you have some type of interest in? Put a note on the face of your plat.
It depends entirely on whether you're an ethical person. If you are, then there's no problem. If you aren't, then you've got bigger problems than surveying your own property.?ÿ An opportunity to be biased isn't the same as being biased. Personally, I have more faith in my own ability to perform a survey that is unbiased than I am in another surveyor's ability. I also believe I can provide a better survey than any other surveyor I would hire.?ÿ
If you're asking whether or not I would rely upon my own survey if challenged. No way. I'd be wanting a second opinion. If unchallenged, absolutely I would rely upon my own work. The appearance of impropriety wouldn't pass muster.
It depends entirely on whether you're an ethical person. If you are, then there's no problem. If you aren't, then you've got bigger problems than surveying your own property.?ÿ An opportunity to be biased isn't the same as being biased. Personally, I have more faith in my own ability to perform a survey that is unbiased than I am in another surveyor's ability. I also believe I can provide a better survey than any other surveyor I would hire.?ÿ
If you're asking whether or not I would rely upon my own survey if challenged. No way. I'd be wanting a second opinion. If unchallenged, absolutely I would rely upon my own work. The appearance of impropriety wouldn't pass muster.
So this may ruffle feathers, but one of the best engineers, surveyors, developers and business men that I ever knew had his own engineering/surveying firm and over 4-5 decades he did all of those things. Were his maps always perfect or his designs without any flaws? No, not from what I could tell though the individual made every effort to fix any issues he ever created too and at his expense. But said individual (PE/PLS who's now deceased) developed the western half of the county that I live in with residential single family subdivisions that covered many square miles and designed/built water systems that he owned/operated for quite a while before selling out to the big corporations that took them over. Said professional also helped the local municipality design the sanitary sewer outfalls and pump stations to help bring commercial development then later went on further at the end of his career to help his firm to secure contract after contract to design and oversee the city's annexation projects where sewer collection systems were implemented. Some here may call it unethical but others may call it opportunity.
?ÿ
I'd say the scrutiny on something like this may be greater these days but I've known many engineers and surveyors who did their own developments. Do it with the same level of care you'd treat a client's project with and to the board's minimum criteria (or minimum design standards of the pertinent permitting authority) at the very least. If it were me, I wouldn't go advertising that I'm the developer but I wouldn't deny it either. Let the planning and permitting agencies know the truth and they'll treat you fairly from the beginning. Some professionals are comfortable with doing so and others aren't - the 2nd party shouldn't judge the first just because opportunity knocked and they didn't answer the door
?ÿ
Furthermore, how many of you have performed a survey on a piece of land that you took an interest in for a client who tells you they intend to sell soon or a realtor who lets you know that it's for sale? How is it fair to you, a potential buyer who's money is just as green as the next man's, that somebody else disclosed to you that the said parcel was about to become available for sale? I don't see it as wrong to want to purchase the land. I've known plenty of surveyors who picked up lots of acreage this way over the years only to later farm it for a profit, flip the land or develop it themselves. I don't begrudge them for doing so either - Just angry with myself for not seizing opportunities like that sooner!!
I don't see much ethical problem with designing your own developments. Does anybody?
I don't see much ethical problem with designing your own developments. Does anybody?
Are you being sarcastic or did you not catch within ncsudirtman's post that he discussed creating residential subdivisions?
At least in areas I'm familiar with, that requires not only the engineering, but also the surveying for the many lots created.?ÿ The work probably touched other people's properties as well.?ÿ Which seems to be exactly what you have argued for several pages against.
I don't see much ethical problem with designing your own developments. Does anybody?
Are you being sarcastic or did you not catch within ncsudirtman's post that he discussed creating residential subdivisions?
At least in areas I'm familiar with, that requires not only the engineering, but also the surveying for the many lots created.?ÿ The work probably touched other people's properties as well.?ÿ Which seems to be exactly what you have argued for several pages against.
?ÿI was only referring to "designing developments". I thought my feelings about the boundary surveying part of what was described didn't need to be restated.
That is pretty much the what-ifs of ethics.?ÿ There is an entire entry level college text on professional ethics that specifically points this out.?ÿ Evaluate your actions and decisions based on the potential outcomes (what if).?ÿ Since we are licensed professionals, it is necessary to consider the public interest in that consideration.?ÿ Of the people who stated they surveyed their own property, they seem to have evaluated and made their decision.
If the determined worst case was tears, I don't know how much difference that would make.?ÿ If it is more than likely to result in nudity, I would feel too bad for the neighbors and I would definitely have to walk away from that job (with clothes on).
?ÿI was only referring to "designing developments". I thought my feelings about the boundary surveying part of what was described didn't need to be restated.
OK.?ÿ Just wanted to confirm you hadn't missed that.
It does seem strange to me to be absolutely against a PLS surveying their own property but fine with a PE engineering their own projects as there is at least as many opportunities and ways to be biased and many of those could have significant detriment to the public.
?ÿI was only referring to "designing developments". I thought my feelings about the boundary surveying part of what was described didn't need to be restated.
OK.?ÿ Just wanted to confirm you hadn't missed that.
It does seem strange to me to be absolutely against a PLS surveying their own property but fine with a PE engineering their own projects as there is at least as many opportunities and ways to be biased and many of those could have significant detriment to the public.
You are putting words into my mouth.?ÿ
And ignoring the ones I am actually typing. We are talking about conflicts of interest not biases.?ÿ
It depends entirely on whether you're an ethical person. If you are, then there's no problem. If you aren't, then you've got bigger problems than surveying your own property.?ÿ An opportunity to be biased isn't the same as being biased. Personally, I have more faith in my own ability to perform a survey that is unbiased than I am in another surveyor's ability. I also believe I can provide a better survey than any other surveyor I would hire.?ÿ
If you're asking whether or not I would rely upon my own survey if challenged. No way. I'd be wanting a second opinion. If unchallenged, absolutely I would rely upon my own work. The appearance of impropriety wouldn't pass muster.
I think you are entirely missing the point. Whether you are an "ethical" person is irrelevant. Our codes of ethics don't tell us to avoid conflicts of interest becasue we are bunch of dishonest skeamers. No-one is accusing anyone of being biased. "The opportunity to be biased" is the problem, not biased surveyors.?ÿ
Picture a perfectly honest Comgressman who, by chance, happens to sell his stocks in an industry that his committee is responsible for regulating the day before an industry insider testifies to his committee that the industry is about to collapse. How could that ethical Congressman possibly convince the public he didn't know what was coming.?ÿ
A conflict of interst isn't a disparagement. It's a condition that we need to avoid to protect our profession, ourselves, and protect the public from those few dishonest specimens.?ÿ
Whether you are an "ethical" person is irrelevant. Our codes of ethics don't tell us to avoid conflicts of interest becasue we are bunch of dishonest skeamers. No-one is accusing anyone of being biased. "The opportunity to be biased" is the problem, not biased surveyors.?ÿ
...A conflict of interst isn't a disparagement. It's a condition that we need to avoid to protect our profession, ourselves, and protect the public from those few dishonest specimens.?ÿ
Yep. Codes of ethics don't care how great you think you are. They are not designed to soothe your ego, nor are they there to "control" you or keep you from making a living. It's not all about you.
Picture a perfectly honest Comgressman who, by chance, happens to sell his stocks in an industry that his committee is responsible for regulating the day before an industry insider testifies to his committee that the industry is about to collapse. How could that ethical Congressman possibly convince the public he didn't know what was coming.?ÿ
Oddly enough, I'm not having any difficulty picturing this....which is a massive, massive problem. And why measures of public trust of Congress have been abysmal for a long time now.
Even more of a problem is that a not-insignificant part of the public - as well as some of the licensees I have worked with - think that sort of behavior is totally fine because they "won".
@aliquot Not missing the point at all. Your hypothetical about the "ethical" congressman is the perfect example of 'unethical" if not illegal practice. That's not the issue at hand. Best one can claim is to survey one's own property might present the "appearance" of "potential" bias.
Every survey conducted has the potential of bias toward the client or the neighbor. That's why we're licensed to protect the public. From whom? Ourselves. If a surveyor is committing fraud, bias or unethical practice, they should give up their license and find another application for their skills.
@aliquot Not missing the point at all. Your hypothetical about the "ethical" congressman is the perfect example of 'unethical" if not illegal practice. That's not the issue at hand. Best one can claim is to survey one's own property might present the "appearance" of "potential" bias.
Every survey conducted has the potential of bias toward the client or the neighbor. That's why we're licensed to protect the public. From whom? Ourselves. If a surveyor is committing fraud, bias or unethical practice, they should give up their license and find another application for their skills.
Landowners have every right (even it can be argued responsibility) to identify and maintain their boundaries. A surveyor/landowner is no different. As a surveyor is there any question that I wouldn't be intimately involved with a survey of my boundary. Not a chance.
About 5-10 minutes of research yields the below. A random assortment of how others view conflict of interest.
?ÿ
American Medical Association
Conflict of interest describes a situation in which a person is or appears to be at risk of acting in a biased way because of personal interests...When a doctor??s ability to act in the best interests of a person or group could be affected by relationships with other people, groups, or businesses, then a conflict of interest exists...if conflicts of interest arise, doctors should clearly state their relationships with all people, companies, and organizations involved. Depending on the situation, this disclosure may occur in person or through statements published online or in print. Being open about conflict of interest allows everyone (including patients and the public) to judge for themselves whether a particular relationship may be influencing a doctor??s actions.
American Bar Association Code of Ethics
Except as provided in paragraph (b), a lawyer shall not represent a client if the representation involves a concurrent conflict of interest....Notwithstanding the existence of a concurrent conflict of interest under paragraph (a), a lawyer may represent a client if...each affected client gives informed consent, confirmed in writing.
National Society of Professional Engineers Code of Ethics:
Engineers shall disclose all known or potential conflicts of interest that could influence or appear to influence their judgment or the quality of their services.
American Speech-Language Hearing Association
Individuals shall avoid engaging in conflicts of interest whereby personal, financial, or other considerations have the potential to influence or compromise professional judgment and objectivity.
A community college:
A responsible individual and CC should consider whether a relationship or situation creates the appearance of a conflict of interest, as well as an actual conflict of interest...For potential conflicts of interest involving a Trustee, the matter should be reviewed by the Chairman of the Board, the Audit Committee, the President...All conflicts or potential conflicts will be reviewed as to whether they are improper or create the appearance of impropriety.
Columbia University Dept of Medical Humanities & Ethics
Conflict of interest can be defined as ??a set of circumstances that creates a risk that professional judgment or actions regarding a primary interest will be unduly influenced by a secondary interest?.
?ÿ
These were just a random sampling, but I don't see any equivocation there. They are all pretty consistent in their general view that a potential conflict of interest must be disclosed to, evaluated by and decided upon by affected parties. Not solely by the practitioner.
How's that work when you are your own client and affected parties (adjoiners) aren't informed?
Anyone want to argue that we are inherently better or more ethical than any of those professions or organizations above?
