Email from Title Reviewer:
"The calls in the ledgend (sic) for the easement do not go with the description. The description is correct, L16, L17, L18, L19,is reading from East to West and the description is reading from West to East. Assuming that the ledgend (sic) is for the Tract Descriptions and not the easement?"
And, my response:
The subject of Reciprocal Bearings (ie, N 10°E is the SAME as S10°W), in relation to it's difference off of north, or south, is the same, except it is 180° different. This is an "Understood" detail, that is an allowable fiction. Such is what is taught in college drafting
Thank you. If you have any more items, be sure and let me know. I do not take offense.
Happy weekend!
Nate
Time to shape up or ship out. Do it right the first time.
When the examiner is not able to read a well drawn plat, they need to get another job.
That depends. If there is only one description, then the bearings should agree with that description. If there are multiple descriptions using the same line, every reasonable attempt should be made to show both directions on that line if both directions are used in the descriptions. Reasonable being the key word. Sometimes there is no room to do so without making a humongous plat. Do not add confusion if it is simple to not do so.
Wow, that's annoying. In defense of the reviewer, he was probably hired knowing nothing about legal descriptions or surveying because either no one with those skills would take the job or the people that hired him did not know enough to realize that these skills were essential. Hopefully you can educate him.
the plat should depict record title even if minor edits have to be made for innocuous labeling.
At least, there was not a revision requested for her spelling error. :-O
It does. We were creating "Record Title" as we went... it was interior to what they owned.
"... , every reasonable attempt should be made to show both directions on that line if both directions are used in the descriptions. "
Eh? Please elaborate... never seen two directions for the same line in a description...
(From the Texas perspective.)
I have seen and used two different bearings on one line. It was a case where one property was being divided into two pieces and (luckily) there was room to annotate both bearings to match the legal description. (A title company was the end user for the two new property owners.)
Property Owner A owned the whole property. Property Owner B was buying a portion of it.
In the attached picture, it's similar to what I worked with but not the real world example. The black text is the original deed description. The Blue text is the new boundary line for prop. owner A, and the orange text is the new boundary line for the new prop. owner B.
(* = Degree symbol for simplicity, along with extra deed information regarding ties and property ownership names and adjoiners.) I've bolded the two lines in the new descriptions that go both ways when following a clock-wise deed description.
Original boundary description for prop. owner A is: Beginning at a found 1/2" I.R., thence N 90*00'00" E, 18.71ft to a 5/8" I.R. found, thence S 90*00'00" E, 20.57ft to a 2" I.P. found, thence S 90*00'00" W, 18.71'ft to a 1/2" I.R. found, thence N 00*00'00" W, 20.57 ft to the P.O.B.
New boundary description for prop. owner A is: Beginning at a found 1/2" I.R., thence N 90*00'00" E, 7.86ft to a 5/8" I.R. set, thence S 90*00'00" E, 11.10ft to a 5/8" I.R. set, thence S 90*00'00" W, 7.86'ft to a 5/8" I.R. set, thence N 00*00'00" W, 11.10 ft to the P.O.B.
New boundary description for prop. owner B is: Commencing at a found 1/2" I.R., Thence N 90*00'00" E, 7.86ft to a 5/8" I.R. set for the P.O.B., thence N 90*00'00" E, 10.84ft to a 5/8" I.R. found, thence S 90*00'00" E, 20.57ft to a 2" I.P. found, thence S 90*00'00" W, 18.71'ft to a 1/2" I.R. found, thence N 00*00'00" W, 9.47 ft to a 5/8" I.R. set, thence N 90*00'00" E, 7.86ft to a 5/8" I.R. set, thence N 00*00'00" W, 11.10ft to the P.O.B.
It doesn't happen very often, but my supervising R.P.L.S. always had me label both directions in situations like this.
**Please note, there may be typos, I did this quickly.**
Update:
Thank you for your response, and just wanted to let you know, I was not questioning your knowledge AT ALL. So I'm sorry if my questions offended you.
However, I had to verify the survey, I know how to ready the directions and which way they are going, but it was difficult to follow when the information did not match for the tracts I am dealing with, but I will work with what you have given us.
Have a Wonderful Day!o.O
My answer:
No offense taken. The main tracts do run the same direction as the descriptions. The problem comes up when there are several tracts, on one plat. I make them match as much as possible, then along comes the easement, and they don't totally match. It's what is described as "an acceptable fiction". The written description MUST be doing the right thing. It is the actual instrument of conveyance, both to convey title, and access (That would be the easement). IF the plat and description agreed, but were going the wrong direction, then we really would have a problem. I found a plat the other day, that actually did that. It moved the survey some 1100 feet into the wrong location, even though the plat looked ok.
I appreciate feedback, and opportunity to explain my plats.
And, I have made typos before. So, I never wish to place myself in the category of those who don't need straightening out sometimes.
Mrs. M, when stuff like this comes up, you will not get a berating from me. I will look carefully, and if I think I'm still ok, I'll try to carefully explain. I'm sure that the day will come when I will be wrong, and need to have your extra set of eyes to catch something.... maybe wrong township, or wrong 40 or something. Thank you for taking the time to put your concerns into writing.
I never take offense at it. I want to be a surveyor that:
1.) You can talk to.
2.) And that makes you feel you can talk to. About any aspect of things.
Grace and Peace in Christ.
Nate
That's what I was talking about
Happens all the time when you have adjoining tracts to describe.