Cee Gee,
Based on your comments, I'm guessing about 8 hours total for this service. Even for a rural area a reasonable professional rate should equate to 8-12 hundred for this service. The fact that attorneys did not find the problem is strong evidence that the one who did, does deserve and should demand a professional fee. I'm also guessing that a "full survey" would only have taken another 2-4 hours roughly. At any rate, it must take at least 3/4 the time to perform a competent MLI such as this, as it would to perform the full survey. I think many surveyors do not think of this type of service when thinking of an MLI. Rather they equate it with a product or commodity that draws a picture without any real sound evidence of what is going on. IN a fairly cut and dried residential area the MLI could be done much more quickly and the split between the time for an MLI and a full survey be much larger, as well as the need for a full survey much lesser.
The problem I encountered when trying to provide the service, rather than the commodity, was an unwillingness to pay for the rural service at a rate any higher than the residential. In addition, rather than up to a full survey when recommended, the lenders and attorneys wanted to (and did) write agreements based on the MLI that showed two possible lines (subject to full survey), although they claimed they would follow the surveyors recommendations. IN addition to that, they passed off the MLI as a survey (although they kept saying they did not). And, in addition to that, they did not pay if the sale fell through (although they kept saying they would).
Have you encountered any of these problems? Do you think having the MLI defined by statute has or would alleviate these problems?
As a surveyor who has been licensed for nearly a quarter of a century, I must say that I'm mystified even today that the issue of MLI, Mtg Cert, Location Report, ILC's, et al are still such a sore spot with our industry.
It seems that it was sometime in the late 70's that a line in the sand was drawn that line divided the surveying profession on this issue.
"Windshield Surveys, "Drive-by Survey", "jack Legged Surveyors", "Survey Mills", "Toilet Paper Factories"...
What I don't understand is; Why some in this profession stand up an beat their chest about how disgraceful this service is even that this service is beneath him and go on to say "I don't do that" (as if he is greater than thou).
The simple fact is, that in most states there are minimum standard detail requirements that must be adhered. If a MLI does not meet that standard, the surveyor who prepared that MLI is in violation of his practice act and is subject to sanction - IT's That Simple folks.
-- You guys talk about this as if it is a pox on our industry. I say it is only a minor persona compared to other misconception we portray to the public. Take for example any project; small residential boundary survey, small construction layout, 5 acre topo, a commercial ALTA, 10,000ft for C&G, -- The estimates very so significantly that the range is sometime %400 apart from one another. - What kind of message does that send the public?
--- Talk about WINDSHIELD Surveys - A couple years I was preparing a fee for an ALTA Survey. An ALTA survey was done prior, just 5 years earlier on file with the City. I lost the job. I contacted the client for feedback. The client informed me he found another surveyor to "UPDATE" the previous ALTA Survey. I asked if it was the previous surveyor? He said no it was not. I asked how could he simply update that work, if he did not do it before? The client told me, that the other surveyor walked the property, verified the information on the ALTA drawing and "resigned" the Survey. - I asked; Resigned - What does that mean? - The client said that the new surveyor signed and sealed a paper copy of the original ALTA, with a statement of 'no changes'.
My point is,
the problem is not the type of work we as surveyors can provide;
the problem is the unscrupulous surveyors that we continue to allow to practice.
Duane:
Your estimate of the time to do an MLI like this is about right. But around here a full boundary survey would require, at a minimum, about a day of additional research and, because it's a hilly, wooded, swampy, remote area, probably another day in the field -- and that's assuming you could generate enough data to calculate the pinsets then and there without a return trip. Then the final drawing would have to be survey-quality and recordable. I'd guess that the bill would be 4 to 5 times what an MLI costs, maybe more. And unlike the case I outlined, many residential parcels around here are 10 to 30 acres, sometimes more. So in a normal year (not this one!) there would be at least a one to two month backlog amongst nearly all the surveyors in this area. That's just not going to fly with most buyers and/or their agents. And again, the MLI is not a "type" of survey, any more than a bicycle is a type of motorcycle. It's done to get title insurance, not to provide boundary certainty. The buyers are free to order a survey if they want one. Every now and then they do.
I have certainly encountered the problems you listed, though not in excess. My MLI's, and those that I've seen from my local colleagues, explicitly state the product's limitations, and I don't feel responsible for abuses.
Maine's land surveying statutes generally control practitioners and, beyond some minimal requirements as to signing and sealing etc., not products. Our board's rules, from about 1984 until 2001, explicitly defined MLI's roughly as I've described them here. The 2001 re-write now in effect abandoned the "cook book" approach, leaving the practitioner leeway to define his or her products but certainly not proscribing MLI's. They do require us to inform our clients (in writing) what they are and aren't getting. I guess the answer to your question would be that our standards don't define MLI's (or much else) but require us to do so. This will not always preclude abuses but I believe it minimizes or eliminates liability for them.
I should add that, for all the squawking I've heard about MLI's over the quarter-century we've been doing them around here, I have yet to hear of a single serious problem that arose from one. I can think of several that arose from crummy boundary surveys!
6th:
If I read you correctly, I think I agree completely.
Well...many mli surveys are "jackleg". Many of the mli factories, demand several of them to be done in a day. They make it extremely hard to compete for a $150 survey. You have a good example of a problem that might get found (or might not depending on the survey factory doing it); but let's not forget that your example is not a typical encroachment. Most are encroachments of a more minor distance or something on the edge of the boundary. They are generally hard to detect without placing or finding the actual corner monuments.
The fact is, as I see it, most of these types of surveys should have five times the charge that is typically attached to them. But maybe I am wrong. Admittedly I am speaking in theory only and don't perform them (and I don't mean that in a holier-than-thou sense).
Tom,
You know as well as I do that the state of our profession in Colorado seems to be at its' crossroads.
The number of unemployed LS's is likely the greatest in history.
What does an unemployed licensed land surveyor to do?
Find a surveying job-
Can't, there are not any, or at least not enough to go around.
Draw unemployeement-
Sure, for awhile. But then what?
Move and find a surveying job-
There aren't any more surveying jobs in Houston than there are in Denver.
Change professions?
Maybe. But most of the licensed land surveyors that I know will never leave.
What's left??
Start your own firm-
Maybe.
But what does this surveyor have to offer a client who already has a surveyor he works with? -- Nothing, really.-- Except price.
So this surveyor offers a fee well below par,
just to get the job and show the client he is good.
Guess what? The surveyor actuality lost money on the job.
The client calls next week and expects the same fee.
This surveyor ups the price a little and upsets the client.
The surveyor gets the job after haggling a little.
The surveyor knows that he can't loose money this go around.
He steam rolls the project through.
Doesn't really conduct the necessary research.
Doesn't provide the necessary checks & cross checks.
After all is said & done, the surveyor 'makes' a little money.
All at the sacrifice of providing a substandard service.
----- I have scene this scenario play out many times the last 6 months
----- The birth of a Low Baller / Jack Leg
------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is where we are as a profession.
And, we are just sitting here, watching it happen.
-
-
"Highminded" Protecting the Public
Here are quotes from two apparently "highminded" organizations in Maine:
From the Maine Office of Licensing and Registration:
OLR protects the public against unqualified, incompetent and unethical practitioners through licensure, establishment of practice standards, inspection, complaint investigation and, when warranted, imposition of professional discipline.
The Preamble from the Constitution of the Maine Society of Land Surveyors:
Recognizing that the true merit of a profession is determined by the value of its service to society, the MAINE SOCIETY OF LAND SURVEYORS does hereby dedicate itself to the improvement and enrichment of the profession of Land Surveying in order that it may serve the welfare of society, community, and State.
It's surprising that protection of the public should be a concept which sounds quaint or is foriegn to a licensed surveyor in Maine.
Cee Gee,
Your research was unarguably a service to your client. But don't kid yourself that because you caught this problem in your research, it translates to MLIs being some great service to the public.
The worst thing about MLIs is that the vast majority of homeowners do not know that they are not getting a survey. The title companies, the attornays, the lenders, and most real estate people know it's not a survey, but they all refer to it as "the survey". Even many of the surveyors who do them, while knowing it is not a survey, refer to it as such.
In spite of good research sometimes catching a title problem (which this was, you have not accurately defined any survey problem associated with it yet), if the homeowners are left with the impression that they got a survey, the public is poorly served.
Evan:
I am all for protecting the public from "unqualified, incompetent and unethical practitioners" and certainly don't think the concept is "quaint or is foreign." My comment about the "high-minded" was intended as mild sarcasm about the sanctimony with which some stake out their positions on this board now and then. Note also that most of the surveyors I know who do MLI's are members of the organization you quote, MSLS.
I'm aware that MLI's are sometimes referred to as "surveys" by other real estate professionals, though I would disagree that they "all" do this. As I said in the post, the MLI's I've done or seen are very clearly labeled, usually with the hardly ambiguous phrase "THIS IS NOT A BOUNDARY SURVEY" and with specific notes about their limitations. In fact, the board definition of an MLI which I cited above required such annotation. I have honestly never seen one which, if read in its entirety, could be mistaken for a boundary survey. I would agree that failure to clearly denote the limitations of an MLI in layman's language is a disservice to the public.
The fact is that, at least in central Maine, it is NOT feasible for every sale to include a boundary survey; MLI's catch problems and help make closings happen, and that is a public service. I am not responsible for the (in my experience, rare) cases of abuse, anymore than is a doctor whose patient swallows a bottle of clearly labeled prescription meds that vaguely resemble M & M's.
Evan:
The problem is, is that even though the bottle is clearly labeled, you are still putting out pills that look like M&Ms, period. Either change them to look like something other than an M&M, or don't prescribe them at all.
I don't care if you label it correctly, the fact is (as posted above) that all the parties (many times, or most of the time) involved treat it as a survey, even though they claim they don't and know better.
While I understand that you've made the case that they seem to work in limited circumstances, it sounds like (from what I"ve read on this board/POB) that almost all of these faux surveys/inspections are so cheap that you begin to set a market value for real surveys because folks get used to the prices and don't understand the difference in the service you're providing. All they see is the end product that it labeled differently, so it's still a "survey map" or "good enough" in their mind.
I won't pretend to know your market in your locale and what works there, I think there's a good reason why many states don't have them.
We don't have them in Texas and I'm glad we don't. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and looks like a duck, most people are going to treat it as a duck no matter how loudly you scream "it's a goose".
Glenn:
Glenn, the MLI sketch may look like a boundary survey drawing from ten or fifteen feet away but it really doesn't resemble one close-up. Certainly not if one reads what it says. And it's half the size! I honestly don't know of a single case of any serious or even mildly serious problem arising in Maine from folks thinking a clearly-labeled MLI is a boundary survey. I would like to see some factual documentation to the contrary.
And because MLI's are almost exclusively ordered by title companies and insurers who do NOT order surveys unless they have a specific problem to address (usually turned up by an MLI!), I'm doubtful that MLI's are having any adverse impact on survey fees. If anything they've kept surveyors busy and thus helped keep them from price wars.
Cee Cee:
Cee Cee,
See Duane Frymire's post at 5:13 where he describes a similar scenario.
I don't live in a state where this is allowed, so I can't give you hard evidence. As I said in my post, I'm summarizing the information I've read over the years on this forum and others. Moreover, I think the point I made that it isn't allowed here or certain other states indicates a concern for potential problems.
If you've found that it works in your area, that's great, I hope you are getting compensated accordingly for your professional time as well as not distilling the market value of a professional land survey.
Glen
Apparently, you have confused my message/intent with Cee Gee's or someone else's.
I am 100% with you on the M&M analogy. If these things did not look like a survey document, the likelihood of them being mistaken for a survey would be far less.
The fact that they are statutorily defined as something less than a survey, that they contain notes stating that they are not a survey, don't mean a lot to most homeowners. Most never read the notes, they just look at the picture, noting the location of the buildings and fences relative to the boundary lines drawn by the licensed professional land surveyor, and notice the official looking seal and signature of the professional land surveyor. To most, that makes it a survey.
I also agree with your contention that the low prices these things normally command set an unrealistically low expectation of the cost of a real survey.
We (thankfully) don't have these in CA, nor do we have a requirement that a survey be performed with a property conveyance.
If MLIs were in a form that did not leave the impression that it might be a survey, I'd have less issue with them.
Anyone who thinks that most homeowners are not left with the impression that they got a real survey for $150 (or $300, or some other price far less than that of a real survey), they are deluding themselves.
6th,
I agree with everything you said.
Glen
> Apparently, you have confused my message/intent with Cee Gee's or someone else's.>
Not sure what you mean by this. I was referring to Frymire's post at 5:13 on 2-13-11, specifically:
The problem I encountered when trying to provide the service, rather than the commodity, was an unwillingness to pay for the rural service at a rate any higher than the residential. In addition, rather than up to a full survey when recommended, the lenders and attorneys wanted to (and did) write agreements based on the MLI that showed two possible lines (subject to full survey), although they claimed they would follow the surveyors recommendations. IN addition to that, they passed off the MLI as a survey (although they kept saying they did not). And, in addition to that, they did not pay if the sale fell through (although they kept saying they would).
> I am 100% with you on the M&M analogy. If these things did not look like a survey document, the likelihood of them being mistaken for a survey would be far less.
>
> The fact that they are statutorily defined as something less than a survey, that they contain notes stating that they are not a survey, don't mean a lot to most homeowners. Most never read the notes, they just look at the picture, noting the location of the buildings and fences relative to the boundary lines drawn by the licensed professional land surveyor, and notice the official looking seal and signature of the professional land surveyor. To most, that makes it a survey.>
> I also agree with your contention that the low prices these things normally command set an unrealistically low expectation of the cost of a real survey.
>
> We (thankfully) don't have these in CA, nor do we have a requirement that a survey be performed with a property conveyance.
>
> If MLIs were in a form that did not leave the impression that it might be a survey, I'd have less issue with them.
>
> Anyone who thinks that most homeowners are not left with the impression that they got a real survey for $150 (or $300, or some other price far less than that of a real survey), they are deluding themselves.
Yes, that's exactly what I'm trying to say.
Glen
OK, gotcha. I was thown off by the subject header.
Your example seems to work well when confronted with a house that is split right down the middle by the offending lot line, but what about a house that sits only 6 inches over the property line?
Or one that is clear, but violates the zoning setback?
I'd venture to say that most cases will not be as clear cut as the example.
Sicilian:
If the setback from the boundary appears to be "too close to call" as regards either a boundary or a zoning setback I always recommend a boundary survey or at least survey-grade measurements.
You're certainly right -- very few cases are as clear-cut, or as extreme, as the example. I offered it simply to demonstrate that an MLI can find a serious problem and serve a purpose.
Sicilian:
Cee Gee; that is what they are for and do provide a good service to a lender. I have caught some very potentially costly problems that were corrected before title was transferred, including one where the ridge line was very close to the boundary line, caused buy a real estate salesman pointing out ownership lines he thought were correct, this time he ate the cost of buying more land from a neighbor who was willing to sell enough land to prevent moving the house. He got away easy on that one. A boundary line adjustment, a survey along with the recording costs for the new descriptions.
jud
a "jack leg" responds>CeeGee
Did you first prepare a mortgage plot plan base on your initial re-con showing distances from the house to the property line> such as 10' +- or prepare ANY plan other than the one you showed here, stamped and certified?
I don't under stand why you would consider yourself a jack leg surveyor. Based on your example I wouldn't feel that way.
And where did I say that anyone that does mortgage plot plans is a jack leg surveyor? I do them on occasion, but I do instrument surveys so I do show offsets to the tenth..In a subdivision that I have played out it would run $350 to $500. A subdivision that I know well, maybe $500 to $750.
I have attempted to follow a jack leg surveyors work in the past. One time he mis-located a creek by 250' in a subdivision of 40,000 SF lots, only about 6 acres of property total but he had it so screwed up. A second time he told me that he was going to bound a piece of property that was being surveyed for a petitioners plan for the land court. I had already run the traverse for the land court, around the perimeter and when I sent the field crew out to locate the bounds for the property corners they came back and said that bonds had been set at their traverse points...
So, local practice, Board of Registration policies and governing statutes will determine who is "jack leg." Remember, think of standing in the court room defending your work, does it pass the "local standard of care"? Will you be able to find another surveyor that will agree with your methods?
Sorry to be tardy in replying but I was away for the weekend and I usually don't get online much on the weekends.
Don
Don:
My initial post was making reference to your statement in the "driveby" thread of a few days ago:
"...a Mortgage Loan Inspection joke:
What's the difference between a 10mph drive by survey and a 40 mph drive by survey????
About 40 bucks.. ($125 vs. $165)
We always called them type of surveyors "Jack Leg Surveyors", and it's not a compliment."
Sorry if I misunderstood you but I read that as MLI = driveby = substandard work.
As to your first question: yes, a much more detailed plan was prepared, signed, sealed, and eventually delivered (a preliminary version was sent when the problem was first discovered). I rendered the sketch here specifically for this thread, in order to simplify and to protect the privacy of the parties.
