-
Disclaimers
Curious as to what the good people of this board think about this note:
THIS SURVEY WAS PREPARED FOR THE EXCLUSIVE USE OF THE CLIENT NAMED HEREON, ONLY FOR THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED. ITS USE DOES NOT EXTEND TO AND IS NOT AUTHORIZED FOR USE BY ANY UNNAMED PERSON OR PERSONS. THIS SURVEY IS NOT TRANSFERABLE TO ANY OTHER PARTY WITHOUT THE EXPRESS PERMISSION AND RECERTIFICARTION BY THIS SURVEYOR TO ANOTHER PARTY.
TIA
Dougie
-
91 Replies
-
This is substantially the same as the disclaimer that I use.
-
Recockulous.
Especially if the survey is publicly filed. Our loyalties are to the boundaries, not individual clients. Anyone ever heard of protecting and serving the public!?
-
Ar thu speling misteaks in the uhrijanal?
The author’s financial liability is probably limited in this way, with or without the disclaimer. But his professional obligations are not.
-
Ah yes, the Elusive Recertificartion.
-
I don’t think it accomplishes what he thinks it does. I don’t believe his exposure to liability is changed with or without the disclaimer.
-
Is farcation when you go on vacation somewhere far away?
Historic Boundaries and Conservation Efforts -
@norman-oklahoma
I hope everyone has a great day; I know I will! -
The ALTAfication of the surveying profession right there.
-
I have never used a disclaimer and never will. Check your work carefully and you don’t need one.
-
IT’S USE DOES NOT
“Its use” … no apostrophe on the possessive, like his and hers. “It’s” is a contraction for “it is”
. -
@hi-staker our loyalties first and foremost are to our clients who pay for out professional services. Unless we are engaged in a government contract, we do not survey for the public at large.
-
Apparently I’m more stupider than I thought because nowhere that I can see does it mention anything regarding the quality of the work performed. Seems to me he’s simply trying to protect his financial interest.
-
Let’s face it, the harsh reality is surveyors are sued because of their deep pockets. Wait until they find out what plumbers charge.
-
The surveys I perform are of existing historical boundaries. It is not mandatory to record the maps unless the land is being subdivided, however I encourage my clients to do so. It helps others to know that a boundary has been surveyed, and where to look for the marks. I can’t see how that would be a bad thing. If you want the results of a survey to be private then don’t publish it.
Historic Boundaries and Conservation Efforts -
Historic Boundaries and Conservation Efforts -
@hi-staker our loyalties first and foremost are to our clients who pay for out professional services. Unless we are engaged in a government contract, we do not survey for the public at large.
That’s…not how professional responsibilty works.
When protection of the public and our client’s interests are at odds, our first responsibility is to the public, not our client. Government contract or not, we don’t get to place our clients above the public. We’re not attorneys and may not advocates for our clients, at least with respect to our services covered under our license.
And so what if they are paying me? Of the (very few) things that might induce loyalty from me, money is not (and never will be) on the list.
It doesn’t mean that we cannot protect ourselves with a disclaimer, but in my experience those disclaimers are more to keep future users from attempting to recycle information that is likely to change in the future (improvements, topographic data, non-boundary type info), and don’t serve much purpose other than to say “I told you so” if and when they rely upon them and get burned. Doesn’t excuse us from meeting minumum standards when recording, and I don’t think that is the aim in the OP.
“…people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.” -Neil Postman -
@chris-bouffard I guess that means you will place the boundary in my favor if I am paying the bill.
My loyalty is to the footsteps of the original surveyor. If that means my client “loses” land they thought they might have owned, so be it.
Thank God I live in a recording state that also codified protection of the public by surveyors.
-
I see something similar on the plats of several surveyors around here also. Hard to imagine what it accomplishes. It’s not going to protect the surveyor from a lawsuit if his negligent error causes loss to a neighbor or to a successor of the client. It would be like a doctor trying to claim his patient’s family can’t sue him after he kills the patient because his services were intended only for the use of the patient.
-
Btw one of the surveyors I spotted using that also uses this:
BOUNDARY LINES SHOWN AND CORNERS SET REPRESENT DEED LOCATIONS; OWNERSHIP LINES MAY VARY. NO GUARANTEE OF OWNERSHIP IS EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED.
I wonder if the client is aware when he hires this person that no guarantee of ownership is going to be implied by the stakes that will be set around his property.
-
In PLSSia the section lines and aliquot lines set out by the land surveyor MUST be such that anyone else dependent on that line can rely upon it fully. What the client might prefer is irrelevant.
The same should hold true in platted subdivisions. Surveying one lot should produce a result no different from that obtained by surveying abutting lots.
We all, as land surveyors, must be able to find existing monumentation with which we can agree.
Log in to reply.