Thank you for that link, Norman. That was a good read. Lessons to be learned, all around, in that one.
What I take from that case is this:
Surveyor gave an estimate of $6000 (today’s money) to do a proper job and eventually accepted $300 to do a cut rate version. He ended up in state Supreme Court (most probably also lower court and State Board) explaining himself. Who needs that?
In reply to the OP. Do you conduct survey work without a fully signed scope of work and fee? Without one you don't have much efficient recourse.
That case is pretty funny. Is that the first guy to think a disclaimer would keep him out of court?
I doubt it, but it is an excellent example of what some people hear when a disclaimer is offered.
The local city tried to hide behind the GIS disclaimer.
The city had made the GIS the official document for zoning (how dumb was that?).
A developer bought a tract of land zoned R3 in the GIS, while the original maps and city council actions had the site as R1-single family houses.
The developer sued once the city denied his plan because of zoning. The city pointed at the disclaimer. The city lost. The court said by making the GIS official (HOW DUMB WAS THAT!!), they lost any kind of protection the disclaimer provided; if it provides any.
We all lose when the county charges $2500 to review the survey and another less law abiding surveyor flags a line for $2000.
If the county is reviewing a survey for $2500, why aren't they just doing the survey? That is insane. What exactly does the $2500 buy the consumer?
There are multiple counties in this price range in CA. Counties that are near fully developed are seeing a lack of income and are shifting toward full cost-recovery on every project. This means my clients have to pay for whatever rate they decide to pay their PLS or Techs who review the work for compliance with the PLS Act. More rural counties are still charging closer to $500 than $2,500 and it is a much easier pill for the client to swallow when deciding between the Surveyor who will record a map showing how they reached their determinations and the "surveyor" who won't leave any license number anywhere and will flag a line then disappear without a trace.
Thanks Norman_Oklahoma. I reviewed Satchell v. Dunsmoor this morning with a couple of SITs getting ready to apply for licensure. I've been trying to imagine what it must have been like to price a survey in rural areas during the Great Depression. I'm speculating here, but maybe Meiser couldn't help noticing a couple of gaunt children sulking around and then let his heart outweigh his better judgment?
Favors and freebies can and do get surveyors into trouble. If your client's situation pulls your heartstrings, just make sure they're being pulled hard enough to get you to perform the survey to minimum standards.
It could well have been that those gaunt children were Meiser's own.
