I know this topic is old hat and beat to death, but I just had to share. I just finished a survey for a tract that had a "bounded by" description. The deed called for 40 acres more or less with a 1.5 acres exclusion. The land around the tract on three sides is a large timber company's property. It had been surveyed decades ago and their lines well maintained. The tract to the west was surveyed in the 70s and we were able to retrace that line with good communication with that neighbor. Also, the 1.5 acres exclusion was well monumented. In short, the boundary lines were clear and the resulting acreage was 39.17 acres. That's pretty reasonable considering the shape of the deed and the "more or less" acreage stated within it. The unfortunate thing for the family is that the tax office had their tract assessed on 55.5 acres. They've been paying taxes on over 16 acres of non-existent land since the 60s. Why can't we convince more land owners that a quality, accurate survey is worth the money and an absolute essential to land ownership?
Like I said, I know this is the same old gripe we always have. I just couldn't resist sharing it. Merry Christmas to all my fellow professionals. May the Lord keep you safe from snakes, ticks, poison ivy and stupid land-owners as you continue to serve the public.
On the other hand...
We completed a survey a couple of months ago that was a combination of 2 tracts and a boundary line agreement on the west side. One tract was deeded as 35 acres more or less; one tract was 10 acres minus a 2.5 acre cutout; the boundary line agreement added 2.75 acres by deed, a total of 45.25 acres more or less by deed. We recovered all but two trees on the west side (we did recover the stumps of the other two), we recovered traces of old barbed wire fence along a drain then along the center of the ridge (both controlling bounds) and stones and iron pins around the remainder. The surveyed acreage was 64.01 acres; a difference of 18.76 acres.
I've seen this many times before. Not just the lacking 0.8 acres (no big deal), but the imaginary 16 acres the county found. Likely the adjoiners are also being over or under assessed for property that they either do own, or do not own.
The issue usually comes from the inadequacies of the assessing department who just assume things to benefit the county, followed up by the ignorance of the taxpayer who does not exersize due diligence. Logically, that would include a proper survey.
To make it worse, the county assessor is immune from any retroactive penalties/reimbursement that may seem to be appropriate. Whereas the property owner is not. Double standard 101. File closed.
The best part is that you fixed things for your client. Always good to be a hero, eh.
Merry Christmas to all!! 🙂
I was expert for a defendant. The plaintiff was a group of land grabber folks. The 'title expert' rewrote every deed description he took from a partial owner to specifically exclude the area. The group takes hundreds of deeds from partial owners every year so sorting out their chains of title is a nightmare. How many woodlots were bounded by Smith, Jones, Owner Unknown and the Road? In the case, the back-title to the deed they took was for 4-acres and they were trying to claim 12-acres. I placed the property with 4.9-acres and found three other parcels in the vicinity that were significantly larger than they should be... I cannot wait for the day when the heirs of Ephraim Smith come through the door to resolve their land. Hope it happens before it's too late.
They should not allow attorneys or unlicensed professionals to perform title examinations, that should be done by someone without advocacy or interest.
Be greatful that the tax map was only 16 acres off.
I did one a few years ago where the tax map called for 35 acres, and the guy actually had 14.