It seems RCW 58.04.007 clearly states that if there is a meeting of the minds as to the location an unknown or disputed line, than a survey and their signatures are all it SHOULD take to make that the true line. The Counties play around with the definition of "disputed" or ignore the statute altogether, of course.
But, given the language of the RCW, if two owners come to an agreement, have some written instrument indicating that agreement, and you show that line on a survey...it should be good.
So, King County essentially says it cannot happen. But, I have done two surveys showing such an agreement in the past year. Lawyer points to RCW, drafts the paperwork, owners sign, and I create a survey that shows their document, and stake it on the ground. Quit claim deeds are exchanged...I have no idea how it works out at the auditor's office.
My point is that if you showed the boundary, and where they think it is, then you have fulfilled the survey portion of that RCW. Sounds like a great idea!
At some point would it not transform into a genuine property corner though the behavior of those who rely on it for orienting their works, improvements and perceptions.
This is one of those basic concepts that I still scratch my head over a little, what constitutes reliance and when and how does that reliance in and of itself establish a corner.
It is a head scratcher, but let me talk while I think..
The courts tell us all property owners have the right to their "piece of the pie" when it comes to dividing lands.?ÿ Property owners have bona fide rights to assume their 300' wide lot is indeed 300' wide, as near as may be determined. And although a "goat stake" relied upon for years as a property corner might imply some color of title through possession or occupation (as in a case where a fence was built to an erroneous point), it doesn't necessarily automatically move the location of the proper corner that a precise survey would determine.
Yes, long term occupation from a bogus point can open up a real can o' worms in a legal sense. But that is generally extraneous to a surveyor's task of determining a property boundary by retracement.?ÿ Let the owners and the lawyers and the courts argue about the ownership..but the location of the original corner must be first determined.
And the head scratcher comes when a bogus corner is inadvertently set by the first surveyor of a parcel creation.?ÿ What weight does it hold??ÿ We could argue that point ad nauseum.?ÿ
My professional opinion is "a corner that was set in the wrong place will always be wrong until someone acts to make it right".
Some states have acquiescence statutes.?ÿ In Iowa if a definite line is treated as the boundary by both adjoiners for 10 years, in a dispute a court must find that is the boundary regardless of measurements.?ÿ This doesn't apply to things that obviously aren't intended as a boundary, such as fencing around a ditch or other obstacle.
I think from other comments that this is one of the shorter times and more extreme positions among the states regarding acquiescence.
Mention was made of title.?ÿ The way I see it, this statute has nothing to do with title and transfers no land.?ÿ Title is who owns it.?ÿ Boundary is where the limits of the property are, and if it is different from the deed numbers it still is not transferring area, just defining what area the title applies to.
Run across a few of these "approximate" corners/property line. Seem to me to be a little bit like being pregnant, either it is or isn't?ÿ
I take solace that unless it's the original corner, in it's original position, undisturbed, every corner I recover is 'approximate' to some degree. Sure be nice though if whoever set it were professional enough to leave their calling card rather than trying to cover their tracks.?ÿ
either it is or isn't?ÿ
It isn't; or it would say it is, right?
Therein lies the problem: some innocent property owner builds a fence, a foot off the line, just to be safe. The neighbor has a proper survey done and finds the "approximate corner" was 2 feet off, the other way. Now the guys fence is off 3 feet, 10 years has gone by, both sides lawyer up and the line is decided by adverse possession. both sides end up spending 10's of thousands of dollars, which could've bee avoided by just paying the first guy to do it right...
Can't argue with that logic. Anything worth doing is worth doing right. I approach every job that way as I assume it will be the smallest job that will create the biggest headaches for me down the road. Every now and then I'll come across another surveyor's cap that just isn't where it's suppose to be and I'm not talking about tenths. Nearly every last one of them I've spoken with would rather hear from me they have a flier out there, than from someone's attorney. That's hard to do when they cover their tracks.
We went out for a "favor" ILC in Colorado.?ÿ And recently, our CEO and President, both an attorney and a PLS, handed out to us a recent discussion with the board about "find and flag" practices.?ÿ He told us our position is to never flag pins and leave them based upon recent suits in the news etc..
Meanwhile, were bouncing around this guys property and locating pins with caps/without, taping distances, taking notes etc etc etc.
He asks, " so that's the property corner right?" I look him squarely in the eyes and say " I have no idea. With no research or calculations yet, That looks to me like a rebar with a plastic cap, and nothing more."
He walks off in a huff.?ÿ He asked the the same questions to 2 other people.
As were about to leave he asks when his survey was going to be ready. I told him, " we're not doing a survey, we're simply collecting some data and taking it back to the office."
He's had it.?ÿ "He says what do i need to do to get a survey here?"
I reply,?ÿ "Look I understand you called in a favor to our office via one of our staff. We're doing the favor. If you really need a survey, its going to take a while to just pull the records, do the research, calculate the recorded points/lines and then come out here to actually break down not just your lot but about 10 or 15 more to make sure we get it done right.?ÿ That will take time and will cost more than just an hour of us stopping by to do a favor."
He asked for the number of scheduling and hired our firm to do a full ISP.
And not once did I or anyone else attest or produce any affirmations of what was or?ÿ wasn't a property corner or line as directed by the Head honcho. Even produced some revenue in the process.
I have set out stakes marked approximate corner for the construction of utilities during subdivision development. I always went back and set proper monuments before final platting.?ÿ
If you mark the approximate corner three feet away from the true corner, then the water meter/gas meter/utility pole spotter will install their facility there and you can go back and set the real corner three feet away from their junk.
We often got the request to set lath for approximate property corners on new home sites for the purpose of laying down sod or grading.
I can see this on a developing site for rough grade or running lines, but I got the feeling that wasn't why the thread started. Some lowballers will run out and wing in crap for owners 'just to build a fence' or some such garbage. Just a way to drive out professional competition and feed the lawyers..
Here in NZ the Govt department that sets the survey rules acknowledges that sometimes you don't need your boundary marked precisely and a stake (think same as lath in US) or a paint spray dot do not require a plan recorded, equally those points have no legal weight in court.?ÿ No one wants to pay as much a fence costs just to know if it's in the right place.
?ÿ
If you were building near boundary Council building inspectors want legal pegs or building set out in terms of boundary and certification provided.
