Boundary Line Agreements

> The next issue I have is simply this: Why bother performing research, recovering record monuments and performing extensive surveys? Just go to all the neighbors and create a boundary line agreement for every survey. Quick, simple, cheap and easy.

How do you even know there is or isn't a problem until you do the survey? I've done a couple BLA's, but they still require a survey. I prefer doing a lot line adjustment or minor re-plat of the area based on the agreed upon locations, then write the descriptions necessary for the proper conveyances, then title is nice and happy forever and ever.

Besides, the quick, simple, cheap and easy will soon become the next surveyors (and subsequent land owners) problem when the attorney (or nowadays - paralegal) screws it up, and they all still need a survey.

> Why bother performing research, recovering record monuments and performing extensive surveys? Just go to all the neighbors and create a boundary line agreement for every survey. Quick, simple, cheap and easy.

Congratulations.......you have now passed your Wisconson state specific portion of the Land Surveyors Exam. Please contact Mr. Schaut to arrange for your certificate.

😉 😉 😉

Is the "red book of rhode island" a publication from the Board of Registration of Rhode Island?

I would do both 1 and 2, although not being familiar with the adverse possession requirements of Rhode island I'd question if step two was necessary. There is the line of thought that possession ripens once the statutory time has passed.

Who is the author of the red book?

why would a boundary line agreement plan be necessary if fee has indeed ripened through adverse possession?

Dtp

I failed the R.I. PLS exam because of questions like that. They have some weird and foreign ideas (at least to me) in R.I. My answer was and still is, find where the line belongs and report the facts. I want no part in helping one neighbor cheat another out of what is rightfully theirs.

In most cases, isn't a prerequisite to using a BLA an ambiguous boundary line? Wouldn't knowing where the boundary line is disqualify the use of a BLA and require a transfer of title?

So just report what exists and offer no solutions? Seems like half the job to me. Seems like you are leaving additional work on the table.

Do the research. You would need to do it in any case... there is no need to stir the pot unless you have the basics in your head.
If you then find that there really is 50' on the ground, inform your client of the options... "inexpensive survey" may then be further defined by your client as either a walk away deal (no further work or field survey), or he may wish to proceed with the survey. He may even want to clear the title.

While the adverse possession may have ripened (10 years in RI), only a court can determine if adverse possession has in fact occurred. How do you know A did not tell B he could put his fence there. Now you're into an acquiescence or parol boundary, or did A actually say, I know where the line is and you can put the fence over the line for now?

The book is
Madson, on
Rhode Island Real Property Boundary Law
by: T.S. Madson II
A publication of LSS Seminar and Publishing Company

For sale by RISPLS as a recommended study guide.

His second example on the topic was spot on: Lots A and B were defined by the other abuttors and by each other. There were monuments found at the four exterior corners, but there was no clear division line between A and B, except for the 5' ledge that each A and B had used as their boundary since the beginning of time. To clean up the title, a boundary agreement would solidify this as the actual boundary.

>why would a boundary line agreement plan be necessary if fee has indeed ripened through adverse possession?

Maybe because a BLA is cheaper than a quiet title action?

Perhaps I will ask the Board of Registration about this when I go for my interview to sit for the exam.

Thank you all for the comments, I would hope to hear from one who sees it on the other side. Madson did go on to state that doing this would be of benefit to your brother surveyors. If someone had laid out the 200' wide lot and you get the agreement, the guy who laid it out wrong is no longer liable.

I thought we were supposed to turn those guys over to the Board for review.

I don't think it advisibale to do a BLA if one can re-create the boundary.
We all know of cases where the boundary evidence is so weak that a surveyor cannot reasonably establish the boundary line.

If I'm lot 1 and my abuuter is lot 2 in "Codespoti acres" which is well monumented and well documented, I highly doubt one can do a BLA.

Rhode Islanders

Drink to many Fribbles!!!

That would be a good question to ask and bring into discussion at seminars.

Remember, many answers are dependent upon the interpretation of the present members. I have seen occasion where there were major disagreements about some basic principles.

Boundary agreements are another tool for resolution and not always an option.

Then at times a boundary agreement is the cure.

Several months ago I recommended a boundary agreement to a group of neighbors by accepting to the middle of a road and to avoid a costly process over something of little monetary value. Now they have a boundary that crosses the road half a dozen times and leaves transferable access to two of the properties in question without multiple easements to each other.

I whole heartedly agree with your last comments. Just because it's wrong doesn't mean the agree-team kicks into high gear.

Now, that being said, most of the time in these type situations, I ask my clients to come in, and if they are on good terms with the neighbors, I ask if it's okay if we include them (typically on a second meeting). I then lay out the facts (by this time I know where the lines should be and where occupation exists on the ground. I explain that while I'm hired by this guy, my license says protect the public, so I'm not an advocate for my client. Sometimes I recommend a BLA, sometimes (very few), I recommend to lawyer up, sometimes I recommend to move the fence.

Each one has a different flavor to it and BLA my not suite my or the clients palette. Sometimes, a fence is just a fence.

Even if you can "recreate" the boundary of lot one and lot two, where is the property line dividing the two owners? There is some doub as to cleart title of that part that is fenced in and crosses the deeded line. To me the title is clouded because (in the case being discussed), one has evidence of adverse possession and the other has evidence of the deed description. If both parties agree to do it, a boundary line agreement can clear title, and document the division line. Even if they decide to agree on the deeded property line they should sign an agreement. If adverse possession has ripened, the person who had the fence could still be the owner without an agreement.

I think you have a virtual "obligation" to help them resolve the area of unknown ownership.

Rhode Islanders

Fribbles are from western Mass. but Rhode Island is famous for coffee milk and frozen lemonade.

Rhode Islanders

Lol....your right..We always stopped at Friendlys on our way to Newport and got Fribbles.

But I almost passed out when somebosy got a 'coffee milk'...my god that looked horrible 😉

"The book is
Madson, on
Rhode Island Real Property Boundary Law
by: T.S. Madson II
A publication of LSS Seminar and Publishing Company"

Mr. Madson never did pass the Texas exam, even though he published similar books here.

That was what I was thinking as well.