The use of the word "encroachment"

I only show objects over the line. I tend to stay
away from the E word. For example, if you have a fence
two feet on your side, maybe your client built it there.
If you think it is the neighbor's fence, then maybe a
previous owner of your client's land wanted him to build
it there.

If you have a adjoining building over your line, maybe
the adjoiner has possession rights by acquiescence or
adverse possession.

I agree with Paul, in that we don't really define an encroachment, we just show where objects are in relationship to the boundary lines. I can't recall ever using the E word on a survey.

I agree with the first reply. I am discussing this detail with another surveyor that is not worried about such language. My initial remark to him as I was reviewing his plan was the following:

"It's been a long time since I had to think about this issue. As best as I can remember, surveyors can not guarantee ownership. Where a deed line is drawn does not always represent rights of ownership. We report the facts without judgment. If there was an agreement that we are not aware of, be it written or verbal, our stating "encroachment" may place us in a position of having to defend our "words". In addition, ownership can change due to rights by use, as we do not know the length of time that differing physical occupancy of an area has existed."

His reply was still defensive of his stand.

I stronlgy disagree with the above posters.
I see where they are coming from, I just disagree with them.

I feel is part of the reason I am being paid as a professional. Is to discern where the property line is and note encroachments over the line.

Thats also why I charge more than $199 to do a survey. 🙂

I think i'm in the minority on this so i can't say that i'm 100% right.

Your spot on with me Joe. I use it all the time. I ain't scared.

My attorney said ,yes it's a legal term, but more often it's a descriptive term that in lay persons eyes is well understood.

I appreciate what I am reading so far. Would like to hear more from Joe regarding his view. As far as cost, I am with you. I was never one to give it away. Happy to have joined this group.

If something is encroaching, say so!

It does not mean that it is illegal, just that it is over the line that you have established. Maybe the land owners know it, but if they don't, they should.

Keith

For the record, If I don't think one is un-professional if they choose not to use the term, I don't want to sound arrogant

i got to run out now...the honey do list is rather long this week..but I'll be happy to share my thoughts later..

I had several attorney's in my office and they all agreed with me. If I found original lot pins and stated where the line ran but there were fences over the line then I used encroachment.

That a judge might determine other rights in no way invalidated my survey or my opinion , nor incurred any liability on me.

That is what we are paid for. Our Professional Opinion.

Always used "Possible Encroachment".

Let me clarify the scenario. The plan illustrates the tie dimension to the deed line as retraced by the surveyor. The question is, would you include the word "encroachment" or is there another word that could be used to flag or convey that there is a potential legal issue?

I agree that it is our responsibility to show the facts. From there it goes.

I don't have a problem with using the word, and don't believe it leaves a legal problem.

Isn't an encroachment simply an object that is over the line; does not mean it is illegally over the line.

Keith

I can't remember seeing the "encroachment" word on plans published by my office, however, the office is aware of encroaching items when we complete a survey. I have seen "Area being enjoyed by so and so" complete with a hatched area on another survey company's plan. Our office just laughed at that.

Scott

"In use by others"
"In use by adjoiner"
"In use with subject parcel"

Don't need the E word to state facts apparent.

An encroachment, by definition, is an illegal act. Citizens in the US are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. A surveyor is not a judge in a court of law. Therefore, a surveyor has no authority to determine if someone is guilty of an illegal act. The only 'encroachment' we can show without giving a legal opinion is when we have in hand a judge's opinion that certain conditions constitute an encroachment; we can then show those conditions.

We also have no responsibility to function as if the deed line was the 'boundary' line, it may not be the property line.

The only time we can safely ignore state laws governing the boundaries of land is when we are under contract to a federal entity that is not required to obey state laws.

As to the garbage of 'legal advice from attorneys' goes, get a copy of Warren Burgers's 1984 annual "Report on the State of the Judiciary' that he presented when he was Chief Justice of the US Supreme Court. In that he stated the American legal system was no longer acceptable for a civilised society. If lawyers were as smart as they think they are, we wouldn't need judges.

Richard Schaut

The Deed line is wherever it is physically established on the ground, not necessarily exactly at the Deed dimension. Therefore there may not actually be an encroachment and you may be slandering someone's title.

However, if you have determined the Deed boundary location then anything that belongs to the adjoiner (fences, buildings, etc) which reaches over the line may be an encroachment. Fences sometimes are built in a convenient location and may be a neighborly accommodation so they aren't necessarily an encroachment.

The fact you are supposed to determine is the fact of the the boundary location.

> I had several attorney's in my office............

Shoot, I was waiting for the punch line.

Where did you get a shark tank that large?

OH HAR HAR HAR!

I have had to do "reverse encroachment surveys", that is what it was called in the task order. Due to erosion, the reservoir had crossed over the boundary line (what the government purchased), and the water was now on the private side of the US boundary line, so it was encroaching on the private landowner.