UK 'Property Boundaries (Resolution of Disputes) Bill

DEREK G. GRAHAM OLS OLIP, post: 329243, member: 285 wrote: Proposed Bill in UK regarding resolving boundary disputes:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/bills/lbill/2015-2016/0014/16014.pdf

Comments ?

Cheers,

Derek

It has the same basic features of some state's laws. One is the Indiana Legal Survey. Basically its sets up a procedure for the parties to have a boundary line surveyed and then accept the boundary. If they accept the results of the survey it becomes binding. If they don't accept it gets kicked into the courts for resolution. I like the idea but my state (Utah) doesn't have such a statute. I get the feeling that many surveyors don't like the idea or that the process would be abused because some landowners might not like the "solution" but accept because they can't afford the court settlement. Others thought that many surveyors wouldn't do it right by boundary law but just stakeout a solution without properly locating the boundary. I still like the idea and process as it allows for landowners to settle their disputes without going to court, they just need to get competent surveyor's to do the work.

That law seems overly complicated with all the surveyors being involved but that might be needed to get it right and avoid the potential abuses. It would still be quite expensive but not as much as going to court. I wouldn't fight it if it was being proposed in my state, maybe try to get it throttled back a bit.

I just skimmed the writing. At least they are trying to fix the subject. I think our system is broken and will remain broken until we can get attorneys, judges and Tile Company‰Ûªs out of the way and move to a system that works. As good as measurements are now I vote we start a Torrens Land Registry system with a type of Land Court for disagreements so property owners can take care of their problems quickly and efficiently. Not have land tile and boundary problems waiting to raise their ugly heads to the unexpected landowner (Usually about the same time the owner realizes the land is worth something). As it is now I feel more secure purchasing a vehicle with a simple "PINK SLIP" than receiving a deed and some phony title insurance policy and I‰Ûªm in the business. My 2 cents once again, Jp

Surveyors are a different thing in UK...

‰ÛÏsurveyor‰Û means any person not being a party to the matter appointed or selected under section 5 to determine disputes in accordance with the procedures set out in this Act, who‰ÛÓ

1. (a) is a member or fellow of the Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors, 10
2. (b) is a member of the Institution of Chartered Structural Engineers,
3. (c) is a member of the Royal Institution of British Architects, or
4. (d) has another suitable qualification specified by regulations made

   by statutory instrument which is subject to annulment in 15 pursuance of a resolution of either House of Parliament.

In Colorado we have boundary line agreements and boundary line adjustments. The agreement is used when the boundry is ambiguous and the landowner want to clean things up and agree on a location. Fairly simple procedure and I have done a couple. The adjustment usually involes platted lots and you have to go through the county review process whereas the agreement is a matter of writing new legal descriptions and a boundary survey for both properties and having everything recorded. Although I understand some of the concerns, I like them because they empower the landowners to work out what works for them, the surveyor is there to make sure their agreement is properly recorded and can be perpetuated.

My only question is why 3 surveyors? I guess the 3rd arbitrates if the first 2 disagree. This does seem a little heavy in structure but I believe the intent is good. I haven't parsed it throughly, that would take a few more readings, but it seems that one surveyor can be used if both parties are happy. Two surveyors if the adjoiner just wants to ensure their rights are protected, and three if the two cannot agree. As long as it progresses only as needed, it makes sense to me. I think the courts here are grossly overused for things that two people should be able to negotiate themselves.

Being a member of RICS, I'm not certain how a member of ICSE or RIBA is qualified for boundary determination. From my understanding, the only organization that certifies geomatic surveyors or land surveyors is RICS. So that to me is the biggest problem with the proposed law. Are those people allowed to do boundaries in general or is this a politcal coup?