ALTA Survey and an undefined easement

> Well it's not really undefined, it's centered on an underground electric line. 10' either side of the electric line, to be "exact."
>

10' on either side or on each side? You may want to be more specific or need more clarification.

> Now the title attorney wants a metes and bounds description of it placed on the ALTA survey. I declined since;
>
> 1) it is not defined by metes and bounds,
> 2) I didn't locate the underground line at the time of installation
> 3) my plan shows the easement, and labels it per book and page as centered on "Underground Electric, marked by others"
>

Well, you have a few options. You can stick to your refusal to write a description or you can either verify the location by digging it up or write a metes and bounds description using a few very carefully worded phrases that would specify that the exact location of the underground line is not known, but approximated by surface location by others.

Tell them to dig it up so you can see it with your own eyes. I'm not joking.

Even then the beneficiary of the easement would have to be in agreement with the change to the easement.

As for "either side" or "each side", it sounds the same to me...20' easement centered on the underground line.

Turn it into a cash cow . Charge them for creating a new description .

Well, it is defined - 10' either side of the line.

It should be sufficient, though, to just show it graphically, and refer to the Bk/Pg, as you have done.

Tell the attorney that it's good the way it is, and that it doesn't have to be given B-D - that you have satisfied the ALTA requirements.

Who is he to say that it needs a M-B description? Why does it need it?

Tell them that this is outside the scope, and if it is needed, then it's an extra, and may involve digging to find the line.

:good:

TOO FUNNY

"10' either side of the electric line, to be "exact.""

That's hilarious!!!!

Wattles on each vs either

Per the late Gurdon Wattles:

"Each" denotes the strip to lie on both sides of the line at all points; "either" implies that the strip may be on one side or the other.

I absolutely agree. Put the ball back in their court and at the same time make it clear that you would be happy to help them - once they have someone dig up the line so you know where it is.

I always state in my contract that I will locate "visible utility appurtenances," although Optional Table A Item #11 is quite clear.

TOO FUNNY

Centered on, are the words that indicate the intent, the 10 foot part is what indicates that the easement was 20 feet wide. Maybe not a perfect description, but the intent is clear, that makes the description adequate and no new description should be written, could be refined further by locating the line and tying it to the boundary by describing it's intersection with the boundary's of the property along with the courses and distance across. Unless they are willing to expose the line, I would not rewrite the current description, that is the document that provided the authority for the line in the first place.
jud

> I always state in my contract that I will locate "visible utility appurtenances," although Optional Table A Item #11 is quite clear.

Jim,

Please carefully consider that wording. I recommend you never use the wording as you have it.

My logic goes like this. Suppose you are sitting on the witness stand in a trial. An attorney hands you a piece of wire and asks you if you can see the wire. Of course you can see the wire, he just handed it to you.

"So if you can see the wire Jim that must mean that the wire is visible, correct? And since this wire is visible why did you not show its location on your survey per your own contract?"

The fact something is buried beneath the surface does not render that thing invisible. Instead you should replace your wording with something like ... "readily apparent evidence of...".

When a utility is buried and stays so for a time, we fairly quickly lose any readily apparent evidence of its location. That is a standard we can and should meet. We should not be trying to locate everything that is "visible".

Larry P

Wattles on each vs either

good catch Bruce.
I would use the description as described in the document and citing "as recorded in: bk xxx, page xxx, xxx county records".

I guess we all know that some 'parasurveyors' think that it's not a legal description unless it has a metes-and-bounds description. Not only has the term legal description be "bastardized" to be any m&b description whether it is the actual legal description attached to the deed, but it has been decided that it's not a legal description unless it is m&b.

Technically, I guess you "could" write a new description identifying the existing wire as the senior call, and, if you went on to write a metes-and-bounds say "approximately described as follows" (or something like that) to clarify that it is not the m&b that is the senior call. I have also (or) stated something to the effect of "the intent of this description is to describe the same location as described in [book-and-page]. Whatever...I say make it clear that your m&b is not the true call, but only something that might help someone else find the wire.

Regardless, I think it is best to educate the lawyer (realtor, title insurer, county employee, or whoever is requesting a metes & bounds) that the actual wire is the legally-described center of the tract. They can save a lot of money if they don't require something they think they need, but would not take precedence over the true and first legal description.

be sure to ask them to kill the power when they dig it up

Or, Larry, just the the phrase in Table A Item 11, "...Observed evidence..."

That's sort of why this phrasing was chosen/ worked out for this go around of the Standards.

> The above is from R.I. and am wondering if someone will say "what does a decision from R.I. have to do with anything?" [...]

No, Rhode Island cases provide probably the most cited body of case law in the United States. For one thing, they are short. Rhode Island is so small that there simply would not be enough room to shelve all the case reports if they were normal length. The other thing is that in Rhode Island cases, all the parties tend to be related, so a property law case may also double as a family law case.

I'd ask for them to get me a utility locate.... and shoot the surface.... and then I'd write it... and then I'd certify that ___ did the locate, and I shot the paint marks from the locate, and created the description from those physical locations.

I'd also certify that all that I'd done, was only as accurate as the locate on ___ date, by __ company. Those reading it will get it.... probably!

I'm sort of rambling one here... I don't do those much, and I'm just thinking out loud.

Nate

also check with the dig safe guys or their guidelines
they can be within 18" or so...