"... and it does not represent part of any valid boundary,..."
How could you possibly know that?
And why would that even matter? Perhaps it is part of something you have no concept of - you're just going to remove it?! That equates to destruction of property...theft if you take it with you.
"As you know from the 2010 standards revision, it is pretty clear that the monuments have to be in the ground before releasing the plat."
Not sure what state you are in, but here in Arizona the powers that be are contemplating overturning this centuries old practice. They want to allow plat recordation prior to staking. The cans of worms they are going to open are beyond comprehension...
Jim
I'm in Kentucky. If I recall correctly, for years there was a note on the board of licensure's website that stated pins were to be set before the plat was released. That was not always followed by everyone.
I guess because it was not in black and white in the standards, it became necessary to spell it out.
> Why would surveyor B have any more authority to 'fix' the issue than the retracement surveyor C?
>
> The authority to fix the matter comes from the property owners.
Surveyor B probably does not have the authority to fix the issue once the boundary has been accepted by the property owners. But if the property owners didn't agree on the boundary, then I would want to know:
- Was the pin set by surveyor B? (I don't know if your jurisdiction requires the pin to be marked with the surveyor's id)
- If it was set by surveyor B is it intended to mark the line or is it some other point? (traverse point, witness point, ect...)
- If it was intended to mark the line is it located where surveyor B set it or has it been moved by a third party?
Only Surveyor B can answer these questions. Without this information the decision to hold or not hold the pin is just guessing (in my opinion).
Follow-up Question
Absolutely not, unless there was specific evidence in the deeds that showed the north lines to be new lines and not following the timber company.
> Why would surveyor B have any more authority to 'fix' the issue than the retracement surveyor C?
>
> The authority to fix the matter comes from the property owners.
No. Neither B or C have authority to 'fix' the issue. B's advantage is that he's the one that was paid to do the job correctly and (apparently) failed to meet the task. He's the one who's likely to cut checks for the damages. B needs an opportunity to go back to the client (and the neighbor), explain the issue, and request permission to 'fix' the mistake (as long as it's not too late to fix). If it is too late, B may need to offer some restitution and mitigate any damages that are outstanding.
All C will do if they proceed with their survey and set new points is interfere with B's ability to do damage control and to maintain some sense of integrity. The typical scenario is: C stakes the "correct" locations, essentially exposing B's failure and trespass. Neighbor 1 encroached upon files a lawsuit against neighbor 2 (who did everything right by hiring the surveyor to mark the boundaries); neighbor 2 enjoins B in the lawsuit and B is completely taken off guard by the complaint with no means of mitigating the damages. B finds himself defending against a trespass action and spending huge amounts of money all because C didn't have the common professional courtesy to call him on the phone and give him an opportunity to fix a mistake.
JBS