Anybody know of a good reference for legal requirements for a Boundary Line Agreement? I read somewhere it had to be on writing, but dang if I can find it.
?ÿ
?ÿ
It varies by jurisdiction, no?
I think in WV and in many other states it is incorporated in the ??Statue of Frauds? and must be in writing to be valid. That being said it may become a fact on the ground over time regardless of the requirement.
Here's the Washington statute:
RCW 58.04.007
Affected landowners may resolve dispute over location of a point or line??Procedures.
Whenever a point or line determining the boundary between two or more parcels of real property cannot be identified from the existing public record, monuments, and landmarks, or is in dispute, the landowners affected by the determination of the point or line may resolve any dispute and fix the boundary point or line by one of the following procedures:
(1) If all of the affected landowners agree to a description and marking of a point or line determining a boundary, they shall document the agreement in a written instrument, using appropriate legal descriptions and including a survey map, filed in accordance with chapter 58.09 RCW. The written instrument shall be signed and acknowledged by each party in the manner required for a conveyance of real property. The agreement is binding upon the parties, their successors, assigns, heirs and devisees and runs with the land. The agreement shall be recorded with the real estate records in the county or counties in which the affected parcels of real estate or any portion of them is located;
(2) If all of the affected landowners cannot agree to a point or line determining the boundary between two or more parcels of real estate, any one of them may bring suit for determination as provided in RCW 58.04.020.
Here's New Jersey's Statute:
2019 New Jersey Revised Statutes
Title 46 - Property
Section 46:3A-5 - Certificate acknowledging line, corners and boundaries; recording; evidence; notice
46:3A-5. Certificate acknowledging line, corners and boundaries; recording; evidence; notice
A certificate, executed by the owners of adjoining lands, certifying that any line, corners and boundaries are allowed and acknowledged by them to be the true boundary between their lands, shall be as fully conclusive and binding as to the parties thereto, their heirs, successors and assigns as though such boundary had been fixed by them by deed or otherwise, and any such certificate, when duly acknowledged or proved, may be recorded in the office of the county clerk or register of deeds and mortgages, as the case may be, of the county in which such lands lie, and, when so recorded, the record thereof shall be receivable in evidence and shall be notice in the same manner and to the same effect as though their respective deeds had been so acknowledged or proved and recorded.
Iowa
?ÿAny lost or disputed corner or boundary may be determined by written agreement of all parties thereby affected, signed and acknowledged by each as required for conveyances of real estate, clearly designating the same, and accompanied by a plat thereof, which shall be recorded as an instrument affecting real estate, and shall be binding upon their heirs, successors, and assigns.
YMMV, depending on the county...some interpret this VERY narrowly.
It seems to me that both of these statutes fail to recognize the bona fide rights of mortgage holders.?ÿ I would think any agreement attempted in this manner would be susceptible to court challenge for reducing the value of the mortgagee's collateral, and that title insurers would except the agreement from coverage, thus complicating future loan transactions.
You probably already know this. I'm not sure if you are asking for a legal opinion outside of statutes or the Montana statute which is here:
F. Relocation Of Common Boundary (76-3-207(1) (a, d and e), MCA).
1. Statement of Intent: The intended purpose of this exemption is to allow a change
in the location of a boundary line between two parcels and to allow a one-time
transfer of a tract to effect that change in location without subdivision review.
2. If the relocation of a common boundary would result in the permanent creation of
an additional parcel of land, the division of land must be reviewed as a subdivision.
If a temporary tract is created, language shall be added to indicate that the temporary
tract is merged forever with the adjacent tract..
3. Within a platted subdivision, a division of lots that redesigns or rearranges the
boundaries of six or more lots must be reviewed and approved by the governing
body and an amended plat must be filed with the County Clerk and Recorder.
4. Certificates of survey or amended plats claiming this exemption must be clearly
distinguished between the existing boundary location and the new boundary. This
shall be accomplished by representing the existing boundary with a dashed line and
the new boundary with a solid line and labeling each as ??existing? and ??new?
boundary lines.. The appropriate certification must be included on the certificate of
survey as provided Appendix A, Section H of these regulations.
I've also run into cases where two landowners agreed on a fence as the boundary, filed deeds to that effect and the governing bodies were barred from jumping into to declare violations to subdivision regulations.
Mileage may vary on that.
As a surveyor I avoid any of those situations except to acknowledge them after the fact and send them to the title person to review.?ÿ
?ÿ
The title company and the mortgage company generally WANT the boundary to be settled. In WA, this statute (strictly interpreted) would only apply to cases where the ownership boundary is ambiguous in both occupation and on the deed.?ÿ
The issue basically can two landowners made a Boundary Line Agreement with no written documents and the Judge accepted that a legitimate.
The issue basically can two landowners made a Boundary Line Agreement with no written documents and the Judge accepted that a legitimate.
The title company and the mortgage company generally WANT the boundary to be settled.
Yes, but they generally don't want to accept a pig in a poke.?ÿ They should be part of the boundary agreement process, not informed of it after the fact.
@skeeter1996ilineit must be in writing PLUS recorded whether or not the agreement is surveyed in Colorado
@skeeter1996ilineit must be in writing PLUS recorded whether or not the agreement is surveyed in Colorado
Then it is in writing and recorded. This happens often with courts which are also exceptions to the subdivision regulations. Basically the court cleaned up an issue. Been there done that a number of times. Probate, wills, disputes, ect. The judge can decree a settlement and that's that. There is a limited time to appeal.?ÿ
It seems odd that two landowners who aren't disputing their boundary ended up in court.?ÿ
"The issue basically can two landowners made a Boundary Line Agreement with no written documents and the Judge accepted that a legitimate."
That may be the wrong way to look at it.
Basically the judge didn't want to waste time with a non-dispute and corrected the record, put an end to the issue and got the thing out of his court.?ÿ
That's another way to look at it.?ÿ
Who drug these people into court anyway?
Regardless of what you use it for, Ted Madson ?ÿhas a sample Boundary Line Agreement published in one of his books, you could google it and might find it. ?????ÿ
Yeah, that would be the smart move on the judge's part.
And isn't a boundary line agreement with no written documents essentially acquiescence?
?ÿ
