Certification to Title Company

The land would probably be all within the boundaries.
Be sure to add the references to the deed and/or deeds that you used to base your decisions.
Without a valid reason, I would say pound sand.

Is your survey based on said Warranty deed??

Is your survey based on said Warranty deed??

yes.

Okie Mike, post: 453835, member: 11404 wrote: ...I cannot say "go pound sand." I am looking to reply professionally.

Thanks

Maybe try, "respectfully, go pound sand?" 😉

Seriously though I have gotten similar requests over the years. I'm probably 50/50 on whether or not I actually complied. Some of them are simple. One was a m&b that had been created from an aliquot senior tract. The title company merely needed reassurance the junior tract was wholly within the original 80 acre senior tract (duh).

Some can get a little trickier. Sometimes when I'm feeling grumpy I look at their request more as a title question than boundary issue and therefor they themselves should be able to satisfy their query. But I have been in the habit of preparing a report with my boundaries for several years. Written correctly, a report will generally address the needs of the examiner.

If you do decide to decline their request, be concise and explain why you cannot give them such a certification. Or better yet explain what documents you would need to make that determination or what field work would be involved.

Okie Mike, post: 453839, member: 11404 wrote: Is your survey based on said Warranty deed??

yes.

Then by definition, doesn't your stamp on the survey certify that said lands are encompassed by said boundary? I'm not understanding the distinction between your survey and a new certification?

i'd guess the request is either coming from a particular examiner within the title company or else somebody outside the title company (lender's attorney, most likely) and is just being relayed through the title company.

i'd respond with a nice email that thoroughly explains your reasoning for being resistant to such a certification. most likely scenario (if the first assumption is the correct one) is it gets kicked up to an underwriter who says ok, and you don't hear about it again. title examiners tend to be the cranky ones, mainly because they tend to be both the most reasonable ones in a title company in terms of keeping things on track, but also because they tend to be overridden more often than any of us would like being...

if it's the second assumption, your email will, in effect, work as "pound sand," because more likely than not the title company will then defend your position.

FrozenNorth, post: 453845, member: 10219 wrote: Then by definition, doesn't your stamp on the survey certify that said lands are encompassed by said boundary? I'm not understanding the distinction between your survey and a new certification?

This is my understanding too.

I am with Paden (the 50/50 part) on this. Usually, I wouldn't have a problem complying with that request. However, if you think that they are wanting you to guarantee that the boundary that you portray on your survey cannot be challenged or that if evidence that you have not discovered might place your result outside of some other box, than you may want to pause and reconsider.

Okie Mike, post: 453835, member: 11404 wrote: I have been asked by a title insurance company to certify that a boundary survey I completed is "wholly within the land described in warranty deed recorded in bk.....". I did not do an ALTA on this property, only a boundary survey. Usually I would have no problem with making this statement, but this survey took some interpretation on my part. The original legal description was vague. North 5280, west 660, etc..No calls for adjoiners, corners, lines, or other properties.

I feel confident in my survey, but I am not sure I should certify to their request. What should I tell the title company? This is a company I deal with often. I cannot say "go pound sand." I am looking to reply professionally.

Thanks

I usually offer the following statement when asked to do this:

"This survey was performed in conjunction with XYZ Title Co. Report No. ABC and represents the property boundary described therein."

The term "wholly within" is, IMHO, odd. I would think "of" would be acceptable.

paden cash, post: 453844, member: 20 wrote: Maybe try, "respectfully, go pound sand?" 😉

Seriously though I have gotten similar requests over the years. I'm probably 50/50 on whether or not I actually complied. Some of them are simple. One was a m&b that had been created from an aliquot senior tract. The title company merely needed reassurance the junior tract was wholly within the original 80 acre senior tract (duh).

Some can get a little trickier. Sometimes when I'm feeling grumpy I look at their request more as a title question than boundary issue and therefor they themselves should be able to satisfy their query. But I have been in the habit of preparing a report with my boundaries for several years. Written correctly, a report will generally address the needs of the examiner.

If you do decide to decline their request, be concise and explain why you cannot give them such a certification. Or better yet explain what documents you would need to make that determination or what field work would be involved.

I was thinking, "Go repeatedly impact the sand until acceptable compaction is achieved."

Dave Karoly, post: 453862, member: 94 wrote: I was thinking, "Go repeatedly impact the sand until acceptable compaction is achieved."

nice. I like it.

I would not make such a certification because the primary purpose of the Deed description is to identify the property. It does not not have to describe the boundaries at all or precisely so. The Deed is the only evidence of title but not the only evidence of location (generally with exceptions); this is another way of saying "what boundaries are is a matter of law, where boundaries are is a matter of fact." A Survey of a Deed should substantially conform to the Deed description but extrinsic evidence may influence the precise location. An interpretation of the Deed language should be that to which the Deed language is reasonably susceptible.

Since the Deed is only part of the evidence evaluated (although the most important piece) I would not certify that the survey is in perfect compliance with the Deed just as I would not certify the same to an old survey of the Deed. Of course a proper survey of a Deed is in law the same although not perfectly in compliance, just the same it could be misleading because the description was not precisely followed.

Dave Karoly, post: 453866, member: 94 wrote: I would not make such a certification because the primary purpose of the Deed description is to identify the property. It does not not have to describe the boundaries at all or precisely so. The Deed is the only evidence of title but not the only evidence of location (generally with exceptions); this is another way of saying "what boundaries are is a matter of law, where boundaries are is a matter of fact." A Survey of a Deed should substantially conform to the Deed description but extrinsic evidence may influence the precise location. An interpretation of the Deed language should be that to which the Deed language is reasonably susceptible.

Since the Deed is only part of the evidence evaluated (although the most important piece) I would not certify that the survey is in perfect compliance with the Deed just as I would not certify the same to an old survey of the Deed. Of course a proper survey of a Deed is in law the same although not perfectly in compliance, just the same it could be misleading because the description was not precisely followed.

Thank you for the reply.

Dave Karoly, post: 453866, member: 94 wrote: I would not make such a certification because the primary purpose of the Deed description is to identify the property. It does not not have to describe the boundaries at all or precisely so. The Deed is the only evidence of title but not the only evidence of location (generally with exceptions); this is another way of saying "what boundaries are is a matter of law, where boundaries are is a matter of fact." A Survey of a Deed should substantially conform to the Deed description but extrinsic evidence may influence the precise location. An interpretation of the Deed language should be that to which the Deed language is reasonably susceptible.

Since the Deed is only part of the evidence evaluated (although the most important piece) I would not certify that the survey is in perfect compliance with the Deed just as I would not certify the same to an old survey of the Deed. Of course a proper survey of a Deed is in law the same although not perfectly in compliance, just the same it could be misleading because the description was not precisely followed.

Good distinction. I can now see why the additional certification might be a bad idea...

Your survey plat depicts your interpretation of the deed. Tell them that your survey plat and your monuments shows your determination of the location of the boundary, and you certified the plat when you signed and stamped it.

Those are my first thoughts. Do they want that statement on your survey plat?

If they want an ALTA provide them a proposal for an ALTA.

The requested certification isnt that complex or onerous. Either your boundary lies completely within the description in the deed or it doesn't. It wouldnt take an ALTA to determine that.

If you issue a Survey with the typical Surveyors Statement in your area then I don't see why an additional certification is necessary unless they need an ALTA as someone else suggested.

Just explain you surveyed the Deed, that requires judgment and interpretation, the Plat and monuments set or found is the work product. Maybe I'm reading too much into it but that certification seems odd to me.

My view is that a professional boundary survey results in an opinion. The surveyor backs up the opinion based upon such things that should be put on the survey. The survey does not fix in stone the location of the boundary or adjudicate where the boundary is. If the opinion is properly formed and within the standard practices of the work in the area then the surveyor has some protection.

The landowners and other interested parties can accept or reject the opinion. If everybody accepts it, builds to it and life goes on for a certain period of years, probably in most states the boundary thus becomes fixed at the survey lines.

If parties reject the survey they can do other things, maybe go to court. The court will then issue their own more powerful opinion. If the surveyor was negligent in their opinion they may be liable.

I wouldn't certify that the boundary is absolutely correct as what I provided was a professional opinion. I'm not a boundary insurer. If parties want more assurance then they can do agreements between the landowners. Landowners own the land and can settle things if they want or they can go to court. Many landowners accept survey lines even if badly done, they don't know any better, don't want to go to court, DON'T want to spend much money. You can do that and after a certain period of years the acceptance fixes the boundary location in most states. From what I've heard their are states where over time the deeds will physically reform the earth to their dimensions. No way I'm going to certify to that!