Been brought to my attention that I needed to remove the statement "subject to all easements, restrictions and reservations of record" from my legal description on a survey plat.?ÿ ?ÿI argued that I won't.?ÿ
Surveyed on a tract of land and split it into two tracts.?ÿ ?ÿBecause of the division, I had to write legal descriptions for both tracts and I put that statement at the end of each description.?ÿ ?ÿMe and the lawyer are arguing about the "blanket statement" and I want to get some input from all of you opinionated surveyors.?ÿ?ÿ
Unless they want to provide a title report, I'd say leave it.
you can't sell what you don't own.
so, the disclaimer is meaningless.
That is a Title Policy Standard Disclaimer.
?ÿ(do you ever consider burdens that are Not of Record?)
I'm just a surveyor, I write descriptions not deeds.
@mightymoe I agree. The surveyor doesn't guarantee title with a survey. He might survey the title boundary (or without a title policy, a deed boundary), but the title itself is outside of his purview. So no need to make a disclaimer that there might be a title issue.
I'd definitely leave it.?ÿ Everyone looks to the surveyor for drafting and documentation of easements, restrictions and the like.?ÿ
Been saying it for a while, we shouldn't be the ones on the hook for all the easements, restrictions, etc, that aren't listed in the current deed.?ÿ
If it got missed in the conveyance, too bad, my condolences, but we shouldn't be the ones who are held liable for not including in our survey.?ÿ We're boundary surveyors, not title or property rights experts.?ÿ
Yes, I do research back further than the current deed, checking for these things, just think that it's a bit F-ed up how the experts can miss something and be covered by disclaimers and exceptions, while we're still holding the bag for all of it.
I think our lobbyists need to push for something that shields us from bad legal work.
I know that some of you here love being the solvers of title and legal problems, and think that's what makes us professionals.?ÿ Good for you.?ÿ But honestly, we don't get paid for all of that, aren't for the most part educated for that, and I believe that it's outside our purview.?ÿ But maybe that's for another thread.
That statement is meaningless from anyone's perspective except a title insurers. What are you trying to achieve by adding that statement??ÿ
If it makes you feel better you could add a disclaimer stating that you are not guaranteeing that all encumbrances are shown on your survey.?ÿ
Your right, a surveyor doesn't guarantee title with a survey, but they are guaranteeing the boundary, and the boundary can't be guaranteed without a thorough investigation of the title. Even though guaranteeing title is not within the purview of a surveyor, title is.?ÿ
I think it's kind of a meaningless statement, because it's subject to all those things whether I say it is or not.?ÿ Also, in my area many of the county road easements are unrecorded, so that statement wouldn't address those major encumbrances.?ÿ
Your right, a surveyor doesn't guarantee title with a survey, but they are guaranteeing the boundary, and the boundary can't be guaranteed without a thorough investigation of the title. Even though guaranteeing title is not within the purview of a surveyor, title is.?ÿ
I think it's kind of a meaningless statement, because it's subject to all those things whether I say it is or not.?ÿ Also, in my area many of the county road easements are unrecorded, so that statement wouldn't address those major encumbrances.?ÿ
Agreed. The function of a description is to describe a piece of real property well enough that a competent professional (licensed land surveyor) can locate it on the ground.?ÿ
When viewed in the context of a deed, it makes sense to place that statement in the conveyance - after the description. But it's simply not an integral part of the description itself. Title and encumbrances are separate from location. Putting it in a description has no practical effect on that location, and is redundant in the sense that servitudes, easements, etc. apply whether or not it is included.
In 16 years I have never had a title attorney or reviewer ask me to place that statement in a description - precisely because they understand that it doesn't mean anything in the context of a description of real property, and because they know that legally valid encumbrances apply whether or not we (the surveyor) add a boilerplate statement at the end of the description.
It's not necessary in the legal description but some similar language should be on the face of the survey, for sure.
@aliquot I don't think I'd ever suggest that what I do provides a guarantee of the boundary.
Ugh, I hate to be too technical with this, but I'd say that what I provide in a boundary survey is a professional opinion of the location of the boundary that is based on the evidence cited in the survey documentation (plat, description, report, etc.) and that the boundary determination is defensible in a court of law. In other words, my boundary is based on the information I reference in the survey. It might be that my boundary is a survey of 10 acres described in a deed from 1975. Perhaps an acre was sold out of it in 1993. If my survey states that it's a survey of the 10 acres and doesn't reflect the acre sold out, then the survey of the 10 acres isn't wrong because it is a survey of the 10 acres from 1975. Now if I'm aware of the acre and I ignore it and show a survey of the 10 acres, it could easily be argued that I am negligent, possibly bordering on fraudulent. But the survey itself is a survey of the 10 acres deeded in 1975. Furthermore, while I don't think I can't guarantee the boundary, I should be able to state that I applied legal principles that would make my boundary determination defensible, if not winnable, in a court of law.?ÿ
