IN MY EMAIL TODAY
Legislative Action Alert
Un-Licensing Surveyors
March 20, 2011
Leadership in the Florida House has decided that one of the best ways to scale back government and to save money is to eliminate unnecessary regulation of our businesses. I suspect most of our members agree with this sentiment.
But as is so often the case, the "Devil is in the Details" and House Bill 5005, which eliminates all regulation and license requirements for professional land surveyors and does away with the "minimum technical standards" for surveys, takes a good idea a little bit too far.
The Title Industry is probably the biggest "consumer" of surveying services. Every day, we rely on the accuracy of surveys to remove the "Standard" title exceptions and replace them with exceptions specific to the insured property. And we are required by law to remove the "standard" survey exception -- so we wind up "insuring" the accuracy of the surveys for our policyholders.
We can do this ONLY because of the high standards set in Florida law. Most of us simply do not have the knowledge to evaluate the technical details of whether a survey has been done properly - we just make certain the survey map states that it meets the "Minimum technical standards." We can rely on this because Florida's survey and mapping regulators have made sure our surveyors had the appropriate education, experience and passed tests before getting their licenses and requires them -- under penalty of fines and losing their license, to meet the (rather strenuous) "minimum technical standards".
As an industry, we simply can't afford to leave the critical function of land surveying to anyone who can buy a used transit and tape measure at their local pawn shop, and slap a magnetic sign on the side of their pick-up. Our customers and our underwriters - to say nothing of the sanctity of the land title system - expect a higher standard.
So we would urge each of you to contact your State Representatives and State Senators and explain your concerns about the proposal to totally deregulate Florida's surveyors in HB 5005. A sample letter is provided here, but we urge you to personalize it and explain in more detail how unlicensed surveyors operating without any standards will impact your business and impair your efforts to protect the certainty of land ownership and boundaries for your customers.
The mailing and e-mail addresses for your local legislators are in the Legislative Guide that we just distributed to all FLTA members. The next committee stop for this bill will be with the House Economic Affairs Committee, so please make a special effort to reach out to any members of that committee who are in your area. A copy of the letter that FLTA sent to every member of this committee is here.
Thanks for your help in protecting the title industry.
Alan Fields
Executive Director
good to see.. do you have the sample letter mentioned? thanks
Very well said!
BRAVO BRAVO!!!
This voice carries a lot of weight!!
That's good news. The title attorneys have more money and lawyers than the surveyors do.
Alan Fields kicks serious butt!!! 🙂
At last, a voice of reason.
Rick
I'm really glad to see this. I wasn't sure what their position would be, but it's good to have some backing coming from the Title Agents.
> I'm really glad to see this. I wasn't sure what their position would be, but it's good to have some backing coming from the Title Agents.
I've been contemplating what to do if HB5005 passes, maybe I'll just go work directly for a title company... They're going to need some help from that day forward. 😉 Some days, they just need someone who can write a decent legal description.
Title Companies don't want you to go away because they need someone to take on the responsibility of the land lines. I love Title Companies.
Sort of like Domino's. First the surveys and next title insurance. Let's see, a insurance that's pays out less than 2% of premiums on claims. That's got to be a real service to the public. The only idiot taking on any liability here is the lowly surveyor at the bottom of the food chain willing to sign for money and take on the responsibility. Yeah the title insurance will pay but then they will sue the surveyor.
So first the surveyor and then next title insurance. Maybe the public for the most part actually would be served by taking this all out. It's buyer be ware NOW it's just in the fine print most don't read.
What needs to be created is a service that establishes and registers boundaries. Adjudicated land title registration. Then the survey would be done right the first time and not need to be repeated every time transfer of title occurred. Title insurance would be eliminated entirely. Saves society a lot of money over the long run. What a concept, but I think it will happen because without coming to this sort of efficiency our whole system won't survive. Parasites can't continue to exist after the host dies.
> Sort of like Domino's. First the surveys and next title insurance. Let's see, a insurance that's pays out less than 2% of premiums on claims. That's got to be a real service to the public. The only idiot taking on any liability here is the lowly surveyor at the bottom of the food chain willing to sign for money and take on the responsibility. Yeah the title insurance will pay but then they will sue the surveyor.
>
> So first the surveyor and then next title insurance. Maybe the public for the most part actually would be served by taking this all out. It's buyer be ware NOW it's just in the fine print most don't read.
>
> What needs to be created is a service that establishes and registers boundaries. Adjudicated land title registration. Then the survey would be done right the first time and not need to be repeated every time transfer of title occurred. Title insurance would be eliminated entirely. Saves society a lot of money over the long run. What a concept, but I think it will happen because without coming to this sort of efficiency our whole system won't survive. Parasites can't continue to exist after the host dies.
What you are proposing is putting land transactions on auto pilot. It won't work. Land Surveying is a people business.
My take on the whole survey/insurance thing is probably different from the norm.
The whole problem goes back to boundaries that haven't been created/established properly to begin with. Poor descriptions/surveys, no corner monuments, PROTRACTION of subdivision boundaries, these have all contributed to a situation where boundaries are uncertain and not established/marked on the ground. This is not the creation of the surveyor but rather our 2nd class boundary title system in the US (although surveyors may have contributed partially over time). Also the US doesn't have a land title system per say but rather an evidence of title system. Your deed is not a guarantee of title to property, but just evidence of title. So you can take your evidence (abstract of title) and ultimately either have it determined by a court that you are/or are not the current landowner. No one guarantees your land title. Same with your boundary. A lot of boundaries have been created without proper marking or documentation, so a landowner may be left to getting an opinion from a surveyor about the location (over and over). The surveyor can't actually establish a boundary, only retrace if there is evidence, or opine. So generally the landowner doesn't get what he/she really needs when the boundary is surveyed. Instead they can get an opinion from a surveyor and pay a premium for title insurance (over and over).
What would be better, and much of the developed world has gone to this, is an adjudication of the title along with proper survey to establish and document the boundary. Once this is done then the title is registered and from that point forward the boundaries and title are guaranteed. You don't need any more surveying other than maintenance of the corner markers that get destroyed, and you don't need to buy title insurance every time the title is transferred. The title is sort of like a car title, if you hold the paper with your name listed you own the land. Transfers and mortgages are easy, just sign a simple document. This is efficient, saves a lot of time and effort (at least after the initial adjudication and registration is completed).
So notice who is in the mix in a big way and who is not. Surveyors are required, title insurance is wiped out. GIS and all it's demands from the public would be well served. There is enough survey work here to employ every competent boundary person they could find for a long time to get the boundary adjudications completed. This work wouldn't carry the high liability of issuing boundary opinions. The lenders and realtors would be in hog heaven. No opinion survey is going to kill their deal, the paper work would be reduced to something like selling a car, sign the back of your title here and I'll give you your check. No big ole closing, one hundred pages of paper recorded with 10 signatures in duplicate. Society and the public would be well served, the surveyor would be providing a respected and valuable service.
In my mind this would be a grand improvement over the current parasitic cluster we have now.
sure, it's called Torrens. been around for a long time. I think Chicago was on a Torrens system before the big fire.
works well, but would be hard to go backwards.. wait, we are going backwards, so it might just work.
Just got this e-mail from a a client of mine. He has passed my plea on to
Good Evening to All
I received this e-mail (see below) from not only a friend, but also a part of making a deal work. He is the surveyor I use on a local base. The State of Florida apparently has issues with surveyors and what they contribute our financing transactions. While this thought process needs to go further, the issue is our state government is thinking about this and feeling, a survey is not necessary. I, as a LO would appreciate all of us to write or communicate with our legislators to back my local surveyors concerns. What is even worse, our title companies are now going to except, on a title commitment a Florida Form 9 and we will not be able to close a deal without affirmative coverage. One of my concerns is that of loan salability, thus Capital Markets is party of this communication.
I would really appreciate our sister company’s thoughts as well as our action in keeping what we do as our profession, intact.
Thanks for your time.
Then a personal response from him to I.
Hey…….
We haven’t met personally, but you should have received my response to your prior e-mail. This response went to 52 Loan Officers in Florida, my secondary marketing people and my closers. I am on your side and wanted to let you know that……………..I appreciate all you do.
So, in addition to my 40+ contacts that urged to e-mail Reps, he urged another 52.
I hope we can make a loud enough noise to make these Reps, pause and think about what they are about to do.