Local Planning board insists on a new "legal description", complete with metes and bounds on every survey. Yet they wonder how come my distances and bearings are always slightly or more than slightly different from the original survey o.O. Couple of local lowballers have their "found" matching "record" all the time. :-@ I have repeatedly argued that a new legal every time a survey is done is redundant if the differences are minor and is also contrary to state statute. I don't know about you, but I have a hard time surveying the same points at different times and with different equipment, and still having exactly the same results to the same 01" and .01'
Plumb Bill, post: 328870, member: 226 wrote: I must disagree, the state I do most of my work in requires a new description and plat be made for EVERY survey. Even if it is a partial survey. The only time we do not have to is if the client expressly states that they don't want it, and I personally think "coaching" them to not request it is unprofessional and against the spirit of the regulation.
"... the state I do most of my work in requires a new description and plat be made for EVERY survey."
That strikes me as extraordinarily strange. Justice Cooley will be turning over many times if he hears this! It is my understanding that each new description would cloud the title based on the original description. I also understand that only a judge can legally change a description...
Dan Patterson, post: 328890, member: 1179 wrote: We have to write them here. This is how it appears in the law:
"PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY
Chapter 40 Page 36 of 107 Last Revision Date: 4/20/2015f) The items that must always be shown are:
1) Title block complying with N.J.A.C. 13:40-8;
2) The State, county and municipality in which the property is located and specific data
as provided by the owner identifying the property or other pertinent identifying data
as deemed appropriate by the surveyor, including block, lot number and address;
3) North arrow, identifying the horizontal datum of the survey (for example, NAD27,
NAD83, magnetic, deed book and page, etc.) and scale;
4) The point of beginning;
5) Metes and bounds of the property in question; all measurements are to be indicated
in feet and decimals of a foot except when legal requirements or professional custom
and usage require another form of measurement; "and again here:
"Chapter 40 Page 37 of 107 Last Revision Date: 4/20/2015
1) The licensed professional land surveyor shall also supply a description of the
property surveyed when the survey is to be used for conveyancing (title transfer or
mortgage). This description must be suitable for use in a deed. The description shall
be by metes and bounds or by reference to a filed plan, block and lot. If a filed plan,
block and lot is utilized, the entire title of the filed plan shall be set forth along with,
the filed plan number and the date on which the plan was recorded in the office of the
County Recording Officer. If there is any deviation from the filed plan to the
completed survey, a description by filed plan, block and lot, shall not be utilized. The
deed description shall be consistent with both the survey provided and the
documentation upon which the survey was based and shall be written in such a
manner as to define the boundary lines of real property unambiguous and sufficient
for a surveyor to lay it out on the ground. This description may be reproduced on the
survey plat itself or may be by separate document. If the deed description is provided
on the survey plat, it must be titled "Deed Description." If a separate document is
provided, the description shall be signed and sealed by the licensed professional land
surveyor responsible for its preparation. "
I don't interpret this to mean that a new description MUST be written to accompany a new survey. That's not at all what it says - it clearly states that the "Deed Description" can be used, and that is what should be done.
What does "This description must be suitable for use in a deed" mean? Who decides its "suitablity"?
In Texas, it is quite common to prepare a new description for every survey (except for lots in a recorded subdivision). I believe the preamble of the description should address the intent, which is paramount for reconstructing a survey and should prevent any clouding of title. For instance, if I were to write a new description of a lot in a recorded subdivision, the preamble would include something to the effect of "being all of Lot 1, Block 1, Name of Subdivision, as recorded in Book 1, Page 1, County Records". In this way, it is clear that the intent is for this description to describe all of whatever Lot 1 is according to the referenced plat. Thus if my calls for monumentation, direction or distance conflict with the actual boundaries of Lot 1, then the intent (all of Lot 1) will trump the bogus call(s) and there are no title issues.
Dan Patterson, post: 328890, member: 1179 wrote: We have to write them here. This is how it appears in the law:
"PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, LAND SURVEYORS LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY
Chapter 40 Page 36 of 107 Last Revision Date: 4/20/2015
f) The items that must always be shown are:
1) Title block complying with N.J.A.C. 13:40-8;
2) The State, county and municipality in which the property is located and specific data
as provided by the owner identifying the property or other pertinent identifying data
as deemed appropriate by the surveyor, including block, lot number and address;
3) North arrow, identifying the horizontal datum of the survey (for example, NAD27,
NAD83, magnetic, deed book and page, etc.) and scale;
4) The point of beginning;
5) Metes and bounds of the property in question; all measurements are to be indicated
in feet and decimals of a foot except when legal requirements or professional custom
and usage require another form of measurement; "and again here:
"Chapter 40 Page 37 of 107 Last Revision Date: 4/20/2015
1) The licensed professional land surveyor shall also supply a description of the
property surveyed when the survey is to be used for conveyancing (title transfer or
mortgage). This description must be suitable for use in a deed. The description shall
be by metes and bounds or by reference to a filed plan, block and lot. If a filed plan,
block and lot is utilized, the entire title of the filed plan shall be set forth along with,
the filed plan number and the date on which the plan was recorded in the office of the
County Recording Officer. If there is any deviation from the filed plan to the
completed survey, a description by filed plan, block and lot, shall not be utilized. The
deed description shall be consistent with both the survey provided and the
documentation upon which the survey was based and shall be written in such a
manner as to define the boundary lines of real property unambiguous and sufficient
for a surveyor to lay it out on the ground. This description may be reproduced on the
survey plat itself or may be by separate document. If the deed description is provided
on the survey plat, it must be titled "Deed Description." If a separate document is
provided, the description shall be signed and sealed by the licensed professional land
surveyor responsible for its preparation. "
People from other states can "interpret" your regs however they want - practicing in a state, though, means you should be intimately familiar with how your board views the reg verbiage - and you should then operate accordingly.
Jim in AZ, post: 328895, member: 249 wrote: I don't interpret this to mean that a new description MUST be written to accompany a new survey. That's not at all what it says - it clearly states that the "Deed Description" can be used, and that is what should be done.
What does "This description must be suitable for use in a deed" mean? Who decides its "suitablity"?
Well you still have to have the description either on the survey or on a separate page with your signature and seal, so you are signing it. Whether or not you use the original text depends on the situation.
Suitability is just another subjective thing thrown into the rules and regulations which are riddled with such terms.
Jim in AZ, post: 328893, member: 249 wrote: "... the state I do most of my work in requires a new description and plat be made for EVERY survey."
That strikes me as extraordinarily strange. Justice Cooley will be turning over many times if he hears this! It is my understanding that each new description would cloud the title based on the original description. I also understand that only a judge can legally change a description...
I don't see how? I don't survey title, I survey boundary line evidence of possession. Also, I don't think better expressing measurements made with modern equipment negates "following in the footsteps". With a modicum of explanation and education as to the process we could point out to laypersons how in some cases historical efforts were quite good. We should never pander to ignorance for fear of " how it looks". The loud guffaws of the ignorant should have no impact as to efforts of the educated.
Also, I'm not talking "expert measurer", setting a tack on someone else's rebar cap, either. Although I will say if you've never worked on parcels worth several million dollars, you don't know what it's like to agonize over a tenth. It's all about perspective.
Plumb Bill, post: 328902, member: 226 wrote: I don't see how? I don't survey title, I survey boundary line evidence of possession. Also, I don't think better expressing measurements made with modern equipment negates "following in the footsteps". With a modicum of explanation and education as to the process we could point out to laypersons how in some cases historical efforts were quite good. We should never pander to ignorance for fear of " how it looks". The loud guffaws of the ignorant should have no impact as to efforts of the educated.
Also, I'm not talking "expert measurer", setting a tack on someone else's rebar cap, either. Although I will say if you've never worked on parcels worth several million dollars, you don't know what it's like to agonize over a tenth. It's all about perspective.
My attendance at seminars and discussions with title officers, land surveyors and attorneys over a 40+ year time span has taught me that the mere fact that I measure a direction and/or distance differently than the previous surveyor does not give me the authority to change a previous legal description. (This is somewhat akin to why the distance between original U.S. section corners is 80 chains.) I certainly have the right to report my findings on a map, but certainly do not have the authority to change an existing boundary description. That clearly creates a possibility of clouding the title. I have heard this so many times from so many different much more educated people than me that I can't imagine it's not true.
Jim in AZ, post: 328918, member: 249 wrote: My attendance at seminars and discussions with title officers, land surveyors and attorneys over a 40+ year time span has taught me that the mere fact that I measure a direction and/or distance differently than the previous surveyor does not give me the authority to change a previous legal description. (This is somewhat akin to why the distance between original U.S. section corners is 80 chains.) I certainly have the right to report my findings on a map, but certainly do not have the authority to change an existing boundary description. That clearly creates a possibility of clouding the title. I have heard this so many times from so many different much more educated people than me that I can't imagine it's not true.
I've never seen a single problem arise from it, and it's been practiced religiously around here for over 50 years.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
Property descriptions can come from most anywhere and do not always follow any previous surveys.
On rare occasions somebody arrives with a description of unknown origin that they want surveyed.
The description usually differs from record enough to change the possible intent of the original purpose and definitely agrees with the client's wants and needs to fix his problem.
I've surveyed these before and must step away from conventional boundary reconstruction into the shoes of the surveyor to show the client's understanding of what he was told he is buying.
The result is a survey showing a representation of what the client wants and showing what it would take to make it work, complete with overlapping, gaps and/or tracts or portions of other tracts of record that make up what the client thinks should be his.....
I sometimes call it a court exhibit to explain the mess......
Plumb Bill, post: 328870, member: 226 wrote: I must disagree, the state I do most of my work in requires a new description and plat be made for EVERY survey. Even if it is a partial survey. The only time we do not have to is if the client expressly states that they don't want it, and I personally think "coaching" them to not request it is unprofessional and against the spirit of the regulation.
"the state I do most of my work in requires a new description and plat be made for EVERY survey"
That sounds really, really messy.
Plumb Bill, post: 328919, member: 226 wrote: I've never seen a single problem arise from it, and it's been practiced religiously around here for over 50 years.
Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
So you're saying that in a chain of title the identical parcel could be described by as many different descriptions as there are deeds?
Jim in AZ, post: 328972, member: 249 wrote: So you're saying that in a chain of title the identical parcel could be described by as many different descriptions as there are deeds?
Jim
Honest question, not trying to be argumentative.
Around here land values plummeted after the Civil War when many folks headed west. Descriptions before that time were generally quite good, bearings and distances given, or at least calls for fences, stone walls, trees, etc. Once the land wasn't worth the per word scriveners fee to convey the property many of these descriptions degraded to "bounded northerly by smith, easterly by jones, southerly by williams, westerly by the road". No mention of earlier deeds, except the all important meaning and intending clause. Unfortunately, many of these bounded by descriptions still describe land in many parts of the states I work in. Do you think in this case that changing the description of the property to match a survey made on the ground clouds the title? How about when they went from the "good" 1700-early 1800's description to the current garbage?
Jim in AZ, post: 328972, member: 249 wrote: So you're saying that in a chain of title the identical parcel could be described by as many different descriptions as there are deeds?
Yes.
Paul D, post: 328973, member: 323 wrote: Jim
Honest question, not trying to be argumentative.
Around here land values plummeted after the Civil War when many folks headed west. Descriptions before that time were generally quite good, bearings and distances given, or at least calls for fences, stone walls, trees, etc. Once the land wasn't worth the per word scriveners fee to convey the property many of these descriptions degraded to "bounded northerly by smith, easterly by jones, southerly by williams, westerly by the road". No mention of earlier deeds, except the all important meaning and intending clause. Unfortunately, many of these bounded by descriptions still describe land in many parts of the states I work in. Do you think in this case that changing the description of the property to match a survey made on the ground clouds the title? How about when they went from the "good" 1700-early 1800's description to the current garbage?
No argument taken! I'm really struggling to comprehend what you guys "over there" are saying. This is a great educational opportunity. (THANK YOU AGAIN WENDELL!!!!!) Yes - every title company I am aware of here would consider that a new description could cloud the title. No doubt in my mind!!
Shawn Billings, post: 328974, member: 6521 wrote: Yes.
Remarkable! As MightyMoe said "That sounds really, really messy."
Jim in AZ, post: 328976, member: 249 wrote: No argument taken! I'm really struggling to comprehend what you guys "over there" are saying. This is a great educational opportunity. (THANK YOU AGAIN WENDELL!!!!!) Yes - every title company I am aware of here would consider that a new description could cloud the title. (They would make the determination on a case by case basis as to whether it actually did.) No doubt in my mind!!
Jim in AZ, post: 328972, member: 249 wrote: So you're saying that in a chain of title the identical parcel could be described by as many different descriptions as there are deeds?
Honestly it's rare to find a parcel that has been surveyed twice in modern times in WV. Also, they struck the "unless the client requests otherwise" part of the regs. It is always required now. 'Round here, the practice varies
In southern WV it is commonly accepted to match the previous plats exactly if you agree, and even cite the previous plat as the basis of bearings. In central and northern WV if you do that it is immediately thought to be a "paper job".
Jim in AZ, post: 328918, member: 249 wrote: My attendance at seminars and discussions with title officers, land surveyors and attorneys over a 40+ year time span has taught me that the mere fact that I measure a direction and/or distance differently than the previous surveyor does not give me the authority to change a previous legal description. (This is somewhat akin to why the distance between original U.S. section corners is 80 chains.) I certainly have the right to report my findings on a map, but certainly do not have the authority to change an existing boundary description. That clearly creates a possibility of clouding the title. I have heard this so many times from so many different much more educated people than me that I can't imagine it's not true.
"This is somewhat akin to why the distance between original U.S. section corners is 80 chains"
Yes it's even in federal law that there will be stability with respect to acreages and dimensions, and that code was only a reaffirmation of law.
It's why the new resurvey acreages on BLM plats have the disclaimer on them:-(
I am beginning to see a pattern here. It appears that in metes and bounds states the deeds are rewritten alot which makes sense as each adjoiners name would change with each transaction, however in PLSS states where we have statutory corners it definitely creates a horribly cloudy title if you write a new legal each time.