Two owners of a land survey company is issued a C&D.
Neither are licensed
The order came down as a result of the two owners using the digital seal and signature of an offsite (out of state) PLS
The C&D stated that the two individuals are not to offer or to practice professional land surveying and to not use a professional stamp/seal that is not their own.
These two owners continue to operate, almost one year after the C&D order.
They argue that the order was to stop the practice that led to the complaint.
(the fact that they were using a PLS stamp that was not their own)
They say that every survey done today is conducted under the direction of a PLS
However, the C&D specifically states that they are to cease in the offer and the practice of professional land surveying.
My question is;
Are they in violation of the C&D?
Should the state board be contacted?
Should an attorney be advised to clarify or to argue the order?
Certificate Of Authorization ?
If the state requires a certificate of authoorization then that is complaint 1 against the firm. If the person in responsible charge is not in fact responsible charge, that is complaint 2 & 3 against the firm and individual professional.
Some state have specifics of what is reponsible charge including time in the office. A professional who starts and ends the day in the office but is in the field all day is considered to be in the office. An NJ LS who is also working in a Florida office is considered not in the office if he is not in the NJ office more than 50% of a work week. The get around guys have a 4 day scheduled workweek M-Th in NJ and Tu-F in FL. They start Wednesday in NJ and end in FL.
There are quite a few remote survey crews that seldom or never see their office. That has never been well defined. In my opinion it may be acceptable for a remote crew to be led by an SIT or Certified Crew Chief but there should be a limit on the quantity that an LS could reasonably be in charge of.
Paul in PA
MAKE the complaint
Are you afraid the BOR is going to smack your hand if you're wrong?
If you know you're wrong... don't make the complaint.
If you think you're right(their wrong), you should make the complaint and let the BOR decide. That's what they're there for.
without reading the cease and desist and knowing your state rules it is impossible for me to really say, however if you think they are in violation, then you should file the complaint.
Bob,
1. Yes
2. Most definitely, Yes
3. That's up to the parties involved
> Two owners of a land survey company is issued a C&D.
> Neither are licensed
>
> The order came down as a result of the two owners using the digital seal and signature of an offsite (out of state) PLS
>
IMO, the Board dropped the ball by not referring it to the AG's office as a matter of fraud, and insisting that the AG prosecute it as fraud.
Consider if some yahoos obtained or forged your stamp and signature and were turning out maps, descriptions, etc. using your forged stamp and signature.
Would you simply tell them to stop and be satisfied with that, or would you press criminal charges? Is illegally using another's identity for work product fraud any less reprehensible than illegally using another's identity for credit fraud? What happens when they screw up? The professional whose identity (stamp & signature) was stolen will probably eventually clear himself of the associated liability, but how much time, money, and effort will it cost? How many other similar liabilities might be waiting to be discovered?
If the licensee is actually involved and has given permission to the two yahoos to electronically apply his seal and signature to work product he is not reviewing, reflective of work he is not supervising, then the Board should have, if not pressing the matter as fraud, at least moved to revoke his license.
Yes, it is a flagrant violation. Yes, report it. Go to the next Board meeting and ask for an explanation as to why they view theft of one's identity for professional fraud with less seriousness than the courts and legislatures have viewed identity theft for credit fraud.
These guys did not steal the seal or signature.
Apparently the LS let them do it.
Here is a copy of C&D & findings
which is of public record on the state website
> These guys did not steal the seal or signature.
> Apparently the LS let them do it.
>
> Here is a copy of C&D & findings
> which is of public record on the state website
>
How do they know that the LS is not in responsible charge? In Florida, he would have to be a principal in the business to operate. If the LS is not operating in responsible charge, but nonetheless letting someone else sign surveys for him, the BOR should discipline the LS. Wouldn't you think?
Certificate Of Authorization ?
> Some state have specifics of what is responsible charge including time in the office. A professional who starts and ends the day in the office but is in the field all day is considered to be in the office. An NJ LS who is also working in a Florida office is considered not in the office if he is not in the NJ office more than 50% of a work week. The get around guys have a 4 day scheduled workweek M-Th in NJ and Tu-F in FL. They start Wednesday in NJ and end in FL.
>
Check out Assembly Bill A3477 It seems to be an attempt to do away with the requirement to have a Licensed Professional in the office by allowing "the use of video and audio conferencing technology".