We maybe do about 10 ALTA Surveys per year. Not a lot and mostly for existing clients that we also did the site design for, but enough to maybe see a trend here. Seems most (not all) lenders and title companies that we have done surveys for no longer care to have original seal/signature paper copies sent to them - they are happy to receive a PDF scan of the original in their email as the final product.
Not sure if this is a good or bad thing, just an observation. Definitely saves paper, I guess.
Anybody else seeing this trend? Have an opinion on it?
Yes, and I think that it is a good thing.
I no longer have a plotter. If they want engineering sized prints they get a pdf. It can be printed at kinkos.
I like it.
How many of those ALTA's are getting recorded at the Courthouse? They don't need originals if it's not going to record. An ALTA I did last winter had no record plat of the parcel itself, only a diagram of a tenth of an acre deeded for road use and the original deed description. It called for pipes at all corners. Now the corners are concrete monuments and not in the deed description positions. A million dollar site and they did not want to bother to pay the $50 dollar recording fee. No I am not in a recording state, but I try to get everything recorded.
The vast majority of our clients who request ALTA surveys only want the PDF. Most of the time they print a reduced copy of it and put it into some sort of report that goes to the lender for financing of the property.
I've never been required to do a Record of Survey along with my ALTA typically because when I tell the client that if various conditions are met, the State requires a RS, they say, "Oh, well, don't worry about that, then."
I think the PDF is a great idea. Sometimes we'll even plot a full size sheet, stamp and sign it, then scan that sheet to PDF and send that out.
I've never been required to do a Record of Survey along with my ALTA typically because when I tell the client that if various conditions are met, the State requires a RS, they say, "Oh, well, don't worry about that, then."
skwyd, sounds like you are explaining to your clients the events that could trigger the mandatory filing of a Record of Survey in California. But, I would like to caution you that the requirement to file in mandatory situations does not fall with the client. It is solely the Land Surveyor's responsibility regardless of what the client wishes to do or not. I sincerely hope that you are covering yourself contractually speaking so that in the event filing is required, you can be paid and not be in a situation where you are footing the bill.
You need to also be cognizant of section 8771(a) which requires a sufficient number of monuments to allow your survey to retraced. This is also the responsibility of the Land Surveyor and not the client. Land Surveyors in California have the responsibility to ensure that sufficient monuments are in the ground (found and set) to allow "...the perpetuation or facile reestablishment of any point or line of the survey." regardless of whether clients for ALTA surveys request monuments or not.
Ric
I like the idea and believe we should have the ability to do this. This reduces plotting and FEDeX charges. My only question is will the PDF have the same legal standing as the original? What type of electronic signature are you guys using?
Dan Rittel, post: 331568, member: 80 wrote: We maybe do about 10 ALTA Surveys per year. Not a lot and mostly for existing clients that we also did the site design for, but enough to maybe see a trend here. Seems most (not all) lenders and title companies that we have done surveys for no longer care to have original seal/signature paper copies sent to them - they are happy to receive a PDF scan of the original in their email as the final product.
Not sure if this is a good or bad thing, just an observation. Definitely saves paper, I guess.
Anybody else seeing this trend? Have an opinion on it?
Predicted this was on the way seven years ago and in Ohio it may require locking the PDF with a digital signature set to certification. I suggest reading the http://www.adobe.com/devnet-docs/acrobatetk/tools/DigSig/Acrobat_DigitalSignatures_in_PDF.pdf&apos ;">Adobe Digital Signatures in a PDF document. Naturally the link is to a PDF document. If the document is altered the signature becomes void and the document reports it has been altered. However, using an image of the pdf to alter the appearance may hide the alteration. Keeping a copy of the original PDF file is necessary as was keeping a copy of the original mylar/print in the past.
to skywd & state guy
the code 8771(a) requires (briefly) that "monuments set shall be sufficient....to assure, together with monuments already existing, the perpetuation or facile reestablishment of any point or line of the survey."
No where does the code state "monuments shall be set". If there are not sufficient existing mons, then yes, set them so there will be perpetuation or facile reestablishment of any point or line. Then you are not in violation.
There is no room for creative interpretation of the code nor for adding meaning.
In other words, the "set" in "monuments set" is an adjective.
Celestial,
Sure there is room for some subjective interpretation - that of "facile reestablishment of any point or line of the survey". If points or lines are intervisible, then they can be readily reestablished (with a total station). Using RTK, any point could be easily reestablished (to what degree of accuracy is another matter) from a single monument.
To me, it turns on professional judgment. If building setbacks are to be established on a site plan (or existing ones shown on that ALTA survey), it is prudent to set monuments at corners shown.
8771(a) can be read in many ways. Offsite monuments properly tied to the local lines is not that hard, it is a mapping task that is often neglected.
The objective is to make your work retraceable ... If your analysis is based on smoke and mirrors, you don't have much to document.
celestialpawn11, you are not the first to state this reading of that section. This sentence has existed in its current or very similar form since the beginning of surveying law in this state. I've consulted with various legal authorities in the state about the "Monuments set..." versus "Set monuments..." (or any other manner in which you wish to frame this) and I was advised that at the time of this writing it was very common practice to word sentences in law in a "Victorian fashion" at that time. I've spent time researching this one, don't believe I am engaging in "creative interpretation", and have a question in case you are interested in answering:
How can a land surveyor ensure the sufficient retracement or reestablishment of any point or line of the survey if no monuments already exist unless you set any?
The land surveyor is the only individual tasked with the authority to set monuments. Setting of monuments is a universal benefit to the public and to other land surveyors. Why argue against that ability and responsibility? In other words, why argue to the nth degree to avoid that which separates you from non-professionals and others that have not been bestowed with the authority to protect the public's interest with respect to property boundaries?
Dallas Morlan, post: 331729, member: 6020 wrote: Predicted this was on the way seven years ago and in Ohio it may require locking the PDF with a digital signature set to certification. I suggest reading the http://www.adobe.com/devnet-docs/acrobatetk/tools/DigSig/Acrobat_DigitalSignatures_in_PDF.pdf&apos ;">Adobe Digital Signatures in a PDF document. Naturally the link is to a PDF document. If the document is altered the signature becomes void and the document reports it has been altered. However, using an image of the pdf to alter the appearance may hide the alteration. Keeping a copy of the original PDF file is necessary as was keeping a copy of the original mylar/print in the past.
The Iowa Courts and Legislature "predicted" this a lot more than seven years ago. We surveyors really need to get with the times. So many of our processes are born out of 18th century (and older) ideas that we continue to cling to. (I know, I just ended that sentence with a preposition.)
Rule 5.1001 of the Rules of Evidence defines what constitutes an "Original." "An 'original' of a writing or recording is the writing or recording itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by a person executing or issuing it. An 'original' of a photograph includes the negative or any print therefrom. If data are stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or other output readable by sight, shown to reflect the data accurately, is an 'original.'"
Likewise, a "Duplicate" is also defined. "A 'duplicate' is a counterpart produced by the same impression as the original, or from the same matrix, or by means of photography, including enlargements and miniatures, or by mechanical or electronic re-recording, or by chemical reproduction, or by other equivalent techniques which accurately reproduce the original."
Rules 5.1002 and 5.1003 define the requirements and admissibility of documents as evidence.
[INDENT]Rule 5.1002 Requirement of original. To prove the contents of a writing, recording, or photograph, an original is required, except as otherwise provided in these rules or by statute.
Rule 5.1003 Admissibility of duplicates. A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original unless (1) a genuine question is raised as to the authenticity of the original or (2) under the circumstances, admission of the duplicate would be unfair.
[/INDENT]
We surveyors seem to get hung up by our own definitions and thought processes which hinder our ability to embrace "newer" technologies. These rules have been codified for over 20 years already with minor changes. The use of digital signatures and digital certifications have been codified for nearly as long. Once you study the digital trade and commerce laws, you'll find that you have a great deal more protection under those laws than you ever had under the antiquated forgery and fraud laws. Even the idea of "locking" the file with a digital certification is "antiquated" as it does not prevent a document from being altered. It does have the advantage of warning the reader when it has been altered. I've pretty much just gone with digital signatures and don't worry about it.
PDF files are the best way, in my opinion, to ensure that you have a true "original" file from which all "duplicates" can be made. All you have to do to protect yourself from forgery and fraud is to maintain your unaltered copy of the "original" file. Every printout of the "original" pdf file is an "original" copy.
It's time for us to join the electronic age before, as Danny DeVito put it in "Other Peoples' Money", we're remembered as the last profession on earth still making "buggy whips." But, we make the best damn buggy whips that can be made.
JBS
Ric Moore, post: 331789, member: 731 wrote: ....In other words, why argue to the nth degree....
Why argue?
M-O-N-E-Y :snarky:
Somebody is going to have to spend some; and nobody wants to, if they don't have to...
I've fully embraced electronic copies and digital signatures and worked through getting set up with advice I learned here on this forum.
Other members of my local chapter sneer at my practice of digital signatures but I consider them luddites, with the deepest respect intended for all other puposes. 🙂 Their hand signed and sealed documents are just as easy to forge if not easier and by state law, my certification is legal.
Dan Rittel, post: 331568, member: 80 wrote: We maybe do about 10 ALTA Surveys per year. Not a lot and mostly for existing clients that we also did the site design for, but enough to maybe see a trend here. Seems most (not all) lenders and title companies that we have done surveys for no longer care to have original seal/signature paper copies sent to them - they are happy to receive a PDF scan of the original in their email as the final product.
Not sure if this is a good or bad thing, just an observation. Definitely saves paper, I guess.
Anybody else seeing this trend? Have an opinion on it?
One of our local title companies wants only a pdf, which I send in color straight from AutoCAD. They have a huge monitor on the wall of the conference room and the pdf is very legible. I rarely send out signed and sealed prints now. Most of my clients appreciate that time is money and I can have the drawing to them in a minute. FedEx used to be here daily - now it is maybe once a month. I gave away my 24" roll plotter because it wasn't being used. There were days in the past when I had both plotters going like crazy for hours. Not no more they ain't. This is the electronic age, and frankly, life is easier for it.
Andy Nold, post: 331813, member: 7 wrote: I've fully embraced electronic copies and digital signatures and worked through getting set up with advice I learned here on this forum.
Other members of my local chapter sneer at my practice of digital signatures but I consider them luddites, with the deepest respect intended for all other puposes. 🙂 Their hand signed and sealed documents are just as easy to forge if not easier and by state law, my certification is legal.
What sort of digital signature system do you use? Or are you just talking about a scanned PDF of a wet-stamped drawing?
Allen Wrench, post: 331839, member: 6172 wrote: What sort of digital signature system do you use? Or are you just talking about a scanned PDF of a wet-stamped drawing?
I use the pdf file printed directly from my cad drawing. Never print/scan. Wet-stamp is a relic of the past that doesn't exist in a digital world in reality. In theory, however, I essentially "wet-stamp" every pdf with my signature and/or seal. The only difference is that I do it with a few mouse clicks instead of pulling a physical object out of the drawer like my pen or my stamp. It's the exact same procedure with the exact same intent and the exact same appearance at the end of the day. "I" stamped, signed and certified "my" drawing. By using a digital process, the meaning is still the same.
I use NitroPro to sign my pdf files. I sign contracts with my signature and I sign/seal drawings with my stamp and signature. They're just password protected image files that I keep protected in a file directory instead of a desk drawer. When the document is printed, the signature or seal with signature appear just as if it were done the "old-fashioned" way. The real advantage is found in the laws that protect my digital signature vs the laws that protect me from fraud and forgery.
When you really think about digital signatures, we all use them all the time in our daily lives. We sign the signature pad when we make a credit card swipe. We enter our PIN when we swipe our debit card. We enter our passwords on too many websites. We even digitally sign our emails without the slightest hesitation. All of those are simply digital methods of confirming your personal identification. Yes. It's me.
JBS
Keep a copy of your original work, hard copy or digital ... whatever you prefer.
since the late 80's we have had good quality Xerox. it is rather simple to cut and paste a hardcopy and then Xerox it, been there and done that (or rather had it done to me).
with a digital copy it just makes it a tiny bit easier, and you don't need anything but a PC/laptop and free software.
I am a strong advocate of digital submittals. Saves paper, saves time, etc.
If the consumer has any difficulty I just point them to a simple add-on piece of software, but that is rather rare these days.
JBStahl, post: 331794, member: 427 wrote: The Iowa Courts and Legislature "predicted" this a lot more than seven years ago. We surveyors really need to get with the times. So many of our processes are born out of 18th century (and older) ideas that we continue to cling to. (I know, I just ended that sentence with a preposition.)
{ Clipped }
PDF files are the best way, in my opinion, to ensure that you have a true "original" file from which all "duplicates" can be made. All you have to do to protect yourself from forgery and fraud is to maintain your unaltered copy of the "original" file. Every printout of the "original" pdf file is an "original" copy.
It's time for us to join the electronic age before, as Danny DeVito put it in "Other Peoples' Money", we're remembered as the last profession on earth still making "buggy whips." But, we make the best damn buggy whips that can be made.
JBS
I agree the courts, federal and state legislatures were ahead of my prediction. Seven years ago I was discussing the requirements necessary to comply with these changes as well as other section of Ohio law and rules of practice for Professional Engineers, Professional Surveyors and Professional Architects. Ohio Revised Code (ORC) 4733.14 includes the following:
[INDENT=1]
Plans, specifications, plats, reports, and all other engineering or surveying work products issued by a registrant shall be stamped with the seal and be signed and dated by the registrant or bear a computer-generated seal and electronic signature and date, but no person shall stamp, seal, or sign any documents after the registration of the registrant named thereon has expired or the registration has been revoked or suspended, unless the registration has been renewed or reissued. (Emphasis & underline added)[/INDENT]
The portion of the Ohio Revised Code limiting Professional Engineers and Professional Surveyors use of electronic seals was removed by legislation that became effective in 2007. This action was taken to comply with changes to both U.S. Code Title (15 - Commerce and Trade, Chapter 96 - Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce) and Ohio Revised Code (Chapter 1306: Uniform Electronic Transactions Act) that predated the 2007 revision. The requirement that "all . . . work products" issued be stamped or electronically signed as well as Ohio government agencies accepting only digital documents was what I was attempting help other Ohio surveyors understand.