Do you have any insight into the NC Board Line weight issue . Its still confusing as to what they are saying and want...
> Do you have any insight into the NC Board Line weight issue . Its still confusing as to what they are saying and want...
I do have some insight. Been working all day. Will try to put together some thoughts and post them later this evening.
Larry P
> Do you have any insight into the NC Board Line weight issue . Its still confusing as to what they are saying and want...
Before I address the September 21st letter from the NC Board of Examiners I want to provide a bit of history.
A couple of years ago one of the members of our chapter was reprimanded by the Board. That member had prepared a plat that showed the line as called for in his clients deed as the proper property line. With much less emphasis he also showed a line that was possibly the limit to which an adjoining property owner might claim. I hedge how I describe the claim of the neighbor because all he showed was a dashed line with no bearings or distances and no way to relate the claimed line to the subject property.
I told this person it was my opinion that his failure to give me or anyone else a way to position the neighbors claim relative to his own survey made him guilty as charged. He pointed to a letter from the board indicating that they had an issue with his failure to show both lines with equal preference. The board seemed to be saying that he was not allowed to make a judgment as to whether the neighbors claim had any merit.
Our chapter felt this issue was important enough that we asked our Chapter President, John Logsdon (PLS and Attorney at Law) to write a letter to the Board asking for clarification. Some of our members recalled hearing the Board Attorney (David Tuttle) express the opinion that surveyors were not allowed express a preference when it came to competing claims. Other members indicated that that opinion must be that of Mr. Tuttle and not the board. Our logic included noting that the Example Plat posted on the board's own website violated the rule.
Several letters and a visit from the Executive Director of the Board later, we were left with the opinion that surveyors are not allowed to express a professional opinion when conflicting claims are found during the course of a survey. As stated in the earlier posted letter any conflicting claims must be resolved by the clients or a court of competent jurisdiction. We are required to show the results of our work in a clear and factual manner.
When our chapter last spoke with the Executive Director of the Board we tried to make the point that there are many ways to be clear and factual without the necessity of the board dictating that lines be of equal weight are the only way to show conflicting claims. Our efforts to convince the Board have thus far been unsuccessful.
Last year we took our concerns to the NCSS board. Some present thought we were nuts and they did not see the big deal. After some persuading, including a statement from Mr. Logsdon that he could take the stated board policy and keep any PLS from expressing a professional opinion in court, the NCSS Board agreed to pursue the matter further with the full NC Board of Examiners and not just the staff.
It was a meeting of Society representatives and Board of Examiners representatives that prompted the letter that was posted.
Despite our making the case that:
1. Surveyors who are unable to express any sort of professional opinion are little more than technicians
2. There are many ways to show the results of a survey in a clear and factual manner rather than just the one way expressed by the board
Our chapter, unanimously, agreed that this is a very big deal and must be resolved in a way that allows the professional to use his or her judgment while providing a plenty of latitude as to exactly how we depict the results of our work.
Larry P
Have an old (1981) Ohio survey plat I would love to have your board review. There are so many conflicting claims & surveys that using the same line weight throughout would be very confusing. Next they will say all line styles must be the same. Once you get all line styles & line weights the same the survey plat I mentioned above would be unusable unless color coded. Then I presume that the color would indicate a preference. Exactly where does this end?
Larry if your interested email me & I'll provide you a copy of the 1981 plat. I've had one attorney say it is exactly the type of exhibit he wants from a surveyor.
On the other thread I posted that it sounds like a lawyer power grab, and you said it had nothing to do with protecting lawyers.
I'm sorry, but it still sounds like a lawyer power grab to me. Whether or not outside lawyers are pushing for this, it seems clear that someone believes that evaluating conflicting boundary evidence is beyond a surveyor's level of competence, and should be left to lawyers.
I agree. I only wonder what took them so long. Here in NY we also have reports of law enforcement setting lines between arguing landowners to settle a boundary dispute. Waiting to hear if there is anything to that one. This on top of the fact that with only one survey map and the surveyor pointing out the monuments, law enforcement will not enforce the line, but rather say it's a civil matter that must be addressed by the court first. But it's already much less likely here for surveyors to be involved in surveying accident scenes anymore.
After reading the board's letter, I am of the opinion that they are just stating what we already know to be our responsibility as surveyors.
Boundaries and title are different matters. A surveyor's job is not to determine matters of title. That is a legal issue, to be resolved by an attorney or a court of law.
The surveyor's role is to determine boundaries.
When a surveyor finds some pins and discovers that the measurements don't match record dimensions, then proceeds to set new pins that do match record, they are issuing an opinion as to title, not boundary.
It sounds as though the board has realized that this is a major issue that must be dealt with.
If the boundary never gets to the Courts and our work goes on through time we are determining title rights as much as any other cog in the wheel. Buildings, fences ect are built as a result of the surveyors work .
:good:
Another couple of things to think about:
There are almost always conflicting elements within deeds themselves, with the deeds and extrinsic evidence and/or within extrinsic evidence itself. Surveyor's are "always" resolving issues of boundaries and/or title. These two things aren't necessarily mutually exclusive in my opinion.
Where is the line drawn on where a professional land surveyor can and cannot make decisions? ("line drawn", get it?) If I am certain that "NW" in the deed meant NE and was a typo, do I still show the widly busted closure that encroaches on other properties? Do I decide that on property is senior to another and the junior property truncates at the senior line? Is there almost always a gap or overlap two adjoining deeds? Is it okay to decide if it only overlaps by 0.3 feet? Maybe there is a min/max distance in rural vs. metro....
Yes, some of these seem like no-brainers, but where does it stop being a matter that I can present a professional opinion on with the client? Aren't I licensed to be able to decipher property descriptions?
a landowner wants and hires you to stake his/her property line for a fence....don't you have to come up with some decisions? Do you possibly tell him/her that they must take it to a court of law?
Calling J.B. Stahl
Material from J.B. Stahl - Survey Summit - The Surveyors role in Conflict Resolution - Not word for word but summerized.
Real property conflicts are made up of 3 categories -
Title Conflicts - issues in rights of property ownership .
Location conflicts - Arise from property owner actions .
Deed conflicts - Conflicts in the description themselves and contain ambiguities and uncertainties.
The Surveyor follows the rules of Boundary Construction as set forth by the Courts or how the Courts may apply the rules.
Title issues (ownership) are of no importance to the Surveyor . That the Survey merely establishes the boundary . they do not determine title to land . Swarz v. Ramala , 63 Kan 66 P , Wagner V. Thompson P.2d278.
A gap or overlap is not a title issue but a conflict in evidence of the two adjoining property descriptions. Legally impossible for a gap or overlap to occur and there can only be one boundary between the two properties. Its the Surveyors role to set the boundary .
So if I use the above information -
The NC Boards ruling that Surveyors must not determine Title issues has no bearing on a our surveys and they are applying an incorrect definition to what Title issues are . Determining Senior Rights is the role of the Surveyor . By putting lines on the survey with no weight is what a pure mathmatician or Engineer would do if he did not know about the rules of Boundary construction .
I sure hope this letter does not mean this is over because this is not viable to the longevity of our Profession .. I have read the letter 5 times and still cannot figure out what they really want .
Calling J.B. Stahl
> So if I use the above information -
>
> The NC Boards ruling that Surveyors must not determine Title issues has no bearing on a our surveys and they are applying an incorrect definition to what Title issues are . Determining Senior Rights is the role of the Surveyor . By putting lines on the survey with no weight is what a pure mathmatician or Engineer would do if he did not know about the rules of Boundary construction .
:good:
