A rural parcel, roughly 1200' x 660', is subdivided into 3 parcels via Parcel Map in 1990. The subdivider's surveyor-of-record -- a civil engineer who finally lost his war with the bottle a couple of decades ago -- set monuments at all the parcel corners, but when he, or rather his crew, did so they appear to have rotated everything by about 10 arc-minutes around a section corner 1300' distant. The monuments fit within themselves kinda-sorta-okay (less than half a foot), but are at odds with the rest of the world by 4 to 6 feet. (You'd have thought that the field crew would have wondered why they were setting rebars six feet away from a 100-year-old fence, but then the company in question wasn't known for hiring the most conscientious.) Occupation lines -- mostly fenced pastures -- generally follow the monuments.
My client owns one of the parcels, and hired me to help her adjust a parcel line to take an odd sliver of land from an adjacent parcel and add it onto hers. The owner of the sliver happens to be the original subdivider, and she's trying to sell her place. She's balking at the idea that she currently has less acreage than is shown on the Parcel Map (she got squeezed between the misplaced monuments and the county road). All of the owners are confused, and none of them are happy.
I'm cautiously hopeful that I'll be able to convince the three parcel owners to clean things up by formally adjusting the interior parcel lines to either 1) fit the monuments, but with the lines lengthened or shortened to stay within the original subdivision boundary, or 2) adhere to the original subdivision dimensions and ignore the monuments that were set, or 3) some combination of 1 and 2. (The business of fences that strayed outside the subdivision boundary due to the survey goof is another matter.) But we're not there yet, and at the moment the visitation of the surveyor is being set down as a great public calamity.
They should see by reason that the monuments do not agree with the original old fences that denote the original boundary/possession.
It is hard to explain someone's past screw up due to a calculation.
Drawing a picture usually is the only way to explain things.
Good luck
Good luck. I got sucked into a similar maelstrom. After the attorneys got involved they requested about 16 quit claim deeds be handed back and forth amongst everyone involved. It generally made a muddy mess out of everything. I believe it was all finally rectified, but only after the attorney fleeced everyone for as much as he could.
Jim Frame, post: 430391, member: 10 wrote: ....the visitation of the surveyor is being set down as a great public calamity.
More often than not, it often seems.
Hopefully you will have success. Difficult position for sure. Difficult to recoup your costs associated with educating all the parties on the situation and paths forward.
One of the bigger challenges in my experience is getting the California LLA process to be viewed by the local agency as a title clearing process rather than the development process many agencies will view it as.
Jim Frame, post: 430391, member: 10 wrote: All of the owners are confused, and none of them are happy.
Good times
Do you mean the interior fences line up with the monuments set in error?
I understand the monuments in trespass on the neighbors outside the subdivision don't affect the outer boundaries of the subdivision (except in certain limited circumstances) but they probably control the interior lines.
Good luck Jim and feel for your mess. Glad to see a guy got the job that understands those errant points control the interior of the subdivision and now the job is damage control and creating peace among neighbors.
Dave Karoly, post: 430449, member: 94 wrote: Do you mean the interior fences line up with the monuments set in error?
Yes, with a few exceptions the fences were built to the monuments. All of the owners assumed that the monuments conformed to the Parcel Map, and had no reason to believe otherwise. One of the subdivision exterior fences is over the line by about a foot on one end and 3 feet on the other, but I've advised my client not to claim to the fence.
Jim Frame, post: 430461, member: 10 wrote: Yes, with a few exceptions the fences were built to the monuments. All of the owners assumed that the monuments conformed to the Parcel Map, and had no reason to believe otherwise. One of the subdivision exterior fences is over the line by about a foot on one end and 3 feet on the other, but I've advised my client not to claim to the fence.
??
Ric Moore, post: 430465, member: 731 wrote: ??
Why not claim to the fence?
I don't know the nature of the exterior boundary of the subdivision but if it was never staked before (something like the east 600 feet of X but never staked) then the erroneous monuments would be the first establishment of the line and would have more value in proving the location of the boundary. Building a fence puts the neighbors on notice that the boundary is potentially being established. Notice is one of the most important aspects of real property law.
On the other hand, if the boundary was already established and marked by monuments such as a section line or center of section line then the erroneous monuments can't move that line. Generally the owners can't establish a line in a different location from where it was already established without a conveyance document because that is a transfer of title.
If a monument is set for the first time but in error the fiction employed is the line has not moved because it was never physically established before.
The neighbor claimed years ago that the "new" fence was on her property, and even went so far as to hammer one of the rebars flush with the ground to make it less visible. The subdivided property is a lot in a 1912 subdivision, and the lot corners were marked with 2"x2"x30" cedar stakes according to the map. If any of those remain, I've not seen them, but even the alcoholic civil engineer knew where the old lot lines are.
Jim Frame, post: 430491, member: 10 wrote: The neighbor claimed years ago that the "new" fence was on her property, and even went so far as to hammer one of the rebars flush with the ground to make it less visible. The subdivided property is a lot in a 1912 subdivision, and the lot corners were marked with 2"x2"x30" cedar stakes according to the map. If any of those remain, I've not seen them, but even the alcoholic civil engineer knew where the old lot lines are.
This sounds like a good example of the practical test of what will be the easiest way to clean up a mess. I'd assume that a new parcel map will have to be recorded in any event since the old one takes in land to which someone else has title, so if that is the case, why not correct the boundaries that the rummy engineer erroneously marked if all of the landowners will agree to do so and be left with the lands that they had thought they owned to begin with.
The formal process I'm aiming to pursue is known locally as a Lot Line Adjustment and Certificate of Compliance. The LLA moves the lines around by means of deeds; the C of C recognizes the new lot configurations as being in compliance with the state Subdivision Map Act and local zoning requirements.
Changing everything back to the way the Parcel Map intended would pull the parcel lines away from fences, and no one wants to have to rebuild their fences. Putting the parcel lines onto the fences would change the parcel sizes, and people hate "losing land." So we're still trying to work out the most equitable and expedient solution among the 3 parties most affected.
