I touched on this in another thread but would like some opinions on the matter. Here is a quick rundown of events so far. Client proposes to build an small apartment building on three adjoining lots. Each lot is separate with unique owners. We prepare 3 ALTAs, one for each lot. We prepare a subdivision plan to combine the three lots into one with the understanding the plan will not be recorded until after the deeds transferring ownership to client. Clients wants us to do an ALTA of the combined lot, not yet combined. We say no but agree to a preliminary drawing full of notes declaring the plan preliminary, not valid, unofficial and do not provide a stamp or signature (I don't make the final decisions and my stamp does not appear on drawings). The 90 days they have to record the plan are running out and even though client does not own the property, they record it anyway and ask us to now do an ALTA of the consolidated Exhibit A describes the property separately as first described, second described and third described. It also shows title of each described piece to current owners, not the client. I believe they are under the impression we can now prepare an ALTA of the consolidated lot. To add to this, included in the scheduled B exceptions are "All matters shown" for both the recorded plan and the preliminary,null and void, unofficial, not-an-ALTA ALTA survey. What would you do?
How did the recorder accept the plat without a signed seal? Wouldn't happen here, the recording clerks have a checklist. Maybe you could put a big font red lettered "DO NOT RECORD" when you send preliminary drawings out. Is your platting authority vigalent about drawings bypassing them and going directly to a recorder? Again here, there are administrative controls at the recorder's office that if there is a platting authority, only the platting authority can submit subdivisions for recording.
The subdivision plan was signed and sealed, the ALTA we prepared for them was not along with other notes to show it was not official. The subdivision plan went through all of the approvals with the municipality and approved with the understanding the property was to be purchased before the plan was recorded. From my understanding, the attorney for our client and municipality decided it would be okay to just record the plan now, then record it again later after the closing was done on the property. We have done this before where a client records the deeds first and in the same trip records the subdivision plan next. Again, I don't make the final decisions around here and my stamp is not on the drawing.
PA PLS, post: 420904, member: 9658 wrote: The subdivision plan was signed and sealed, the ALTA we prepared for them was not along with other notes to show it was not official. The subdivision plan went through all of the approvals with the municipality and approved with the understanding the property was to be purchased before the plan was recorded. From my understanding, the attorney for our client and municipality decided it would be okay to just record the plan now, then record it again later after the closing was done on the property. We have done this before where a client records the deeds first and in the same trip records the subdivision plan next. Again, I don't make the final decisions around here and my stamp is not on the drawing.
The client had a mylar drawing of the Preliminary drawing? Wow... huge mistake! NOBODY records my drawings without my approval.
How could the subdivision plan be submitted for approval without a petition from all of the land owners, and the signatures for the ownership set up for the ownership as confirmed by a Title document? Sounds like their are way big differences in how your platting authority operates than what we have here. Here there is a second title "certificate to plat" document run withing 24 hours of recording to make sure all of the ownership and encumbrances are in line with the subdivision plat ownership declarations. Did your client sign stating he was the sole owner of the property?
The client signed on behalf of his LLC buying the property. So far everyone seems to feel the same as I do. The plan should never have been recorded. Once the plan is approved by the municipality we will print mylars to get signatures. If I have any say in the future, we will not do so in a case such as this until a deed transferring ownership has been recorded. My issue now is concerning the ALTA they currently want us to prepared. The title commitment correctly identifies who has title to the properties. In my opinion, there is no way to certify to an ALTA with any mention of the three lots having been consolidated. I also don't see any way the recorded subdivision can be mentioned since it is not in any way a legal document since the signature on it was not the owner of the property. We used to a lot of work with this company years ago then nothing for about 10-15 years. I am beginning to why they have returned with the assumption other surveyors grew tired of this type of BS.
What? The client signed the plan and then recorded it? That sounds like fraud? Is he duly authorized and licensed? Did you and your staff work under his direct supervision? Did he realize that he made what I would consider to be an Engineer's or Attorney's mistake by signing something he had no business signing?
The plan was signed by the client on behalf of his LLS as the sole owner of the property to be consolidated. The deeds conveying the property to his LLC had not been, and still not have been recorded. My licensed boss signed as the surveyor.
You say: "Clients wants us to do an ALTA of the combined lot, not yet combined."
When the lots are combined, comply. Until then, to quote Mrs. Regan, just sat "NO."
Ken
PA PLS, post: 421031, member: 9658 wrote: The plan was signed by the client on behalf of his LLS as the sole owner of the property to be consolidated. The deeds conveying the property to his LLC had not been, and still not have been recorded. My licensed boss signed as the surveyor.
FRAUD? The client did not own all three lots and has committed fraud if he said he was the owner.
However, it is possible he has three iron clad Agreement of Sale contracts to purchase said property and such contracts are recorded, (here in PA the record document would be in a Miscellaneous Book, not a Deed Book, but is still listed in the Grantor/Grantee record). Given those record contracts he could sign as "Beneficial Owner" see Black's Law Dictionary.
If the deal goes South the recorded merger may still be valid and the three owners now become 1/3 owners of a new lot.
Paul in PA
A Deed does not have to be recorded to be valid. Recording is voluntary but the enticement to record is constructive notice.
Some states (or at least one) have a provision where plats can be filed without the owner signing. This is an exception to the subdivision regulations and is controlled by the county government (clerk).