-
What makes a survey?
I have a disputed line. The line by one subdivision map may be calculated by bearing and distance. Although long ago, the lines of this map calculate well together and fit well with evidence found at the site.
The dispute is with an older map (one year older) that appears to show the same subdivision, i.e. the lot numbers are the same, but their configuration is different. My problem with this map, unlike the other has no bearings or distances to calculate.
The dispute stems from the fact that the two maps are graphically different, i.e. when scaled, an overlay shows differences in the disputed line. In fact, all of the lines are different and I contend it is because the older map is nothing more than a sketch.
It would be similar to using the assessor map to dispute a recorded survey. The older map does not have a surveyorƒ??s name or seal. The later map does have a surveyorƒ??s seal and was recorded less than one year after the older map.
My opinion is that the later map supersedes and corrects the inconsistent older map. It does not create a valid argument for a property line dispute. The older map is simply a fraudulent map, thus, not a survey.
-
21 Replies
-
Preliminary, perhaps? A “Concept drawing” before the real deal got done?
N
-
Was the older map recorded?
-
First off, how was each parcel purchased? In other words, under which map did the parcel owners acquire title, and is that consistent since the time of division?
Which map do the lines of improvement and occupation match, or does it vary from parcel to parcel? Have you talked to any of the old timers or others in the area that may know the history of the parcels and lines of occupation?
Also, just because something may be preliminary, just a concept, or doesn’t meet your expectations, does make it “fraudulent”.
-
Both maps are recorded. I tried to look up the company names to contact, but it is long ago… I agree that it may have been a preliminary or concept as Nate wrote. Else, why were the two maps recorded within a year of each other except to say the later map is valid. Basically, I can’t agree that the older map can be used to show any difference in the boundary unless we were to take into account the differences in the entire subdivision the roads and a nearby lake. I mean you can twist and scale the map many ways and it will never be congruent with anything on the later map.
Historic Boundaries and Conservation Efforts -
Does the older map show any monuments?
-
Yes Brian, some parcels were purchased based on the older map, so one might consider junior / senior rights. I could also sell a parcel by referring to the assessor’s map, block and lot number, but I don’t see how anyone could dispute a survey boundary using such a document.
I did talk to people and found that a good many of them dropped the name of a person who had a reputation for performing fraudulent surveys. In fact, his license was revoked for that very reason. I am trying not to smear him, but, if I cannot convince the disputer in any other way…
One surveyor did review my work and was in agreement with me. He was working with the disputer. However the disputer will keep trying and I’m afraid this will never end. That’s what makes it so much fun.
Historic Boundaries and Conservation Efforts -
How large is the discrepancy, and does the person trying to hold the older map, have alot of money?
🙂
N
-
There are a few monuments on the later plan, but, not on the older one. As time went by other surveyors have done work in the area of this “camp” subdivision so monuments exist from those surveys too.
Historic Boundaries and Conservation Efforts -
I can’t see into your records, the deed books and such. Do they explain the difference? For instance was Lot 1, Block 1 sold before the second map was recorded. That would mean the property was purchased using the older plat. If the first property was sold after the recording of the second plat then that gives the second plat more authority. Also are there changes to the division’s name or are they identical.
Sounds like a mess.
-
The person trying to hold the older map has been through several surveyors and the latest one is trying to work out a boundary line agreement, which only tells me that he doesn’t know where the boundary line is. I don’t think my client wants a boundary line agreement, so I’m getting an attorney… and money.
Historic Boundaries and Conservation Efforts -
Yes, in general these lake resorts or camp lots from long ago were basically drafting board surveys. If there were any monuments out there, only the surveyor who created the lots would know and probably used that exclusivity to get more work staking out the lots. A real mess indeed.
Historic Boundaries and Conservation Efforts -
I would think the principle arguments against the older map would be
1) lack of dimensions and angles-scaling isn’t a standard practice. How can anyone say where the lines were with any precision?
2) lack of signature and seal-nobody put their authority behind the depiction. Was it recorded by the owner?
3) nothing on the older map fits in any detail with many features on the ground- if streets don’t fit and found monuments don’t fit then it wasn’t used to build the development
Question: is there occupation at the disputed line? Do you have an acquiescence statute?
Arguments for the older map
a) lots were sold specifically with reference to the older map. It isn’t clear how anybody found the lot with no dimensions. Were there good monuments at that time, or even popsicle sticks?
b) the older map was recorded first. By whom, and what was their authority? Was it the owner?
c) the newer map apparently does not say it is a corrected plat
. -
Those are great thoughts Bill. There is no occupation. The newer map refers to the older map in the title block, but, no specific notes or explanation on either of the two maps. The owner of the property was the same in both cases, but, the company doing the work changed in less than a year.
Historic Boundaries and Conservation Efforts -
Why would there be a later map if the older map was intended to be used?
There was an Oregon case, Hicklin v. McClear (1889) – where a plat map was made up and recorded and lots were sold. Later a new map with a different lot configuration was made up, recorded ,and lots were sold. Trouble is, one of the buyers of the older configuration lots had showed up and occupied a portion of his lot. First buyer had color of title.
So I’d be checking to see if any lots were sold in the interegnum between the creation of the first map and the creation of the second. If none were, then the second map is going to be the current map at the time of sale.
-
Not like a tax map. What you describe was put together for private contractual purpose. A deed referring to it makes it part of the deed and it will be allowed into evidence.
It’s authenticated based on your own facts that it is mentioned in deeds and can be found/identified in the record per said description.
There’s no presumption that all parcels of a subdivision were surveyed on creation of the map, but there is a presumption that parcels were surveyed on sale and title taken with a view of the premises. So it’s quite possible that some parcels were surveyed per the old map and some by the new.
As always, the best evidence of the original line will control unless the original line crosses some superior title line, location on the ground of which is provable.
You have the start of a good argument why the older map might not be a part of the best evidence, but I would forget about references to fraud or the older map not being allowed as evidence.
-
“It does not create a valid argument for a property line dispute.”
I was tracking you until you made this statement. We’ve all seen disputes, valid or not it is not our job to decide, generated from far less evidence than this. You might look for a document in the record or a deed in the subdivision that explains why there are two maps. This could be daunting task but might generate a clue that solves the question.
-
Was there an owner’s dedication on the latter plat? If so, that could clarify some of the issues, but I’m assuming there isn’t since you didn’t indicate there was one. Perhaps the plat book and page are referenced in the current or prior deeds specifying which plat was referenced in the deeds to convey title.
If there’s nothing of record to define which plat was used as a basis to convey title, the issue will probably end up being resolved in court. I can promise you the adjoiner will be able to find an attorney that’s perfectly happy charging $250hr to argue the case regardless of the merits.
Personally, if there is no evidence of record regarding which plat was used to convey title, I’d prepare the survey based on the latter plat that had bearings and distances shown, especially if it jibes with the existing corner monuments, and reference that plat’s book and page in the surveyor’s declaration and make notes that there is a conflicting plat.
-
So it appears you are saying the claimant likes the older map? Did the original Deed for their Lot refer to the older map? If so I think they have a point…just because the line can only be scaled doesn’t mean they aren’t entitled to that approximate location, especially if the difference is palpable.
It could be the two maps refer to the same physical location with the newer map more and better data.
If both original Deeds refer to the newer map then I would think the older map is not relevant to location. Or if an owner referring to the new map is senior then the newer map should control.
-
A lot of maps are rerecorded.
Example: i subdivide 500 acres and file the map. I now own all the lots but I don’t like the layout. A year later I subdivide everything again. Now, I start to sell off lots. I should construct a deed that recites the second map when conveying title.
Issues crop up when I subdivide, sell off lots and then resubdivide the remaining lots. I cannot include the sold off lots. I have to keep that in mind when subdividing around those lots. Any overlaps will yield to the existing lots that were sold.
Now, if a title company or surveyor does not do their due diligence and missed the second map, the chain of title will have to be ran back to see what was conveyed out first.
This is actually more of a question of title than it is of surveying.
-
Look closely to see what lots were sold prior to the recording of the second drawing and check all deeds for the reference as to what drawing they refer to.
Many developers ran to the record the first drawing possible to begin selling property and all they generally see is $$$$$ instead of monuments.
Log in to reply.