RADAR, post: 381571, member: 413 wrote: [USER=11920]@Joanie[/USER]
...But I digress; I wanted to offer you a little more free advice, something that I haven't seen anyone mention yet:
The number 1 thing to remember, as you go into this; you only own what your deed says you own. Nothing more, nothing less. What the person you bought the property told you, you were buying, that's it. It appears that more than 1 surveyor has given their opinion as to where the property boundaries are situated on the ground and there is a conflict...Good luck with what ever you decide to do and try not to spend to much money...
Please keep us updated.
Thank you,
Dougie
Thank you, Dougie. What you mentioned is exactly what we are looking for in a resolution - to keep the lot and land that we thought we were buying and was conveyed to us in our deed. As I mentioned in previous comments, the first plat I posted (12/09) is the one specifically referenced in our deed as the plat to the land we were buying. I feel like that should carry some kind of weight in this argument. I don't know, maybe it doesn't. That is our reason for wanting to consult a lawyer. To everyone telling us to avoid lawyers at all costs, notice I didn't say we were retaining a lawyer. I said consult - so we can ask questions like can the land in the plat and survey referenced in our deed be legally changed by a new surveyor?
I didn't come here to accuse or throw anyone under the bus. As I mentioned to , we did a Google search to find out as much as possible about situations similar to ours (e.g. conflicting surveys) and their outcomes. A couple of times this site came up in the search. As I read through some threads on RPLS, I saw that there were some extremely knowledgeable people giving really great advice and sharing their expertise with regular, laypeople like me. I joined so I could learn more about the profession and the regulations that govern it. I have also learned that the laws and requirements vary (and in some instances, vary greatly) from state to state. We needed a starting point in our argument with the new survey and rods placed, and IMO there is no better way to arm yourself than with knowledge.
Mostly everyone here has been extremely helpful and given out great information on the duties and requirements of a surveyor. Also, of great importance, how to know the difference between a good surveyor and a not-so-good surveyor (notice I didn't say bad here 😉 ), as well as advice on where we should start in our situation. I am in absolute agreement that litigating is not the way we want to go. It is stressful, expensive, and lengthy. We also don't want to penalize anyone, we just want what we thought was ours as referenced in our deed. We are also open to bringing in a 5th surveyor (not 3rd as some of you have mentioned) to try and figure out this mess.
Our first step has been to get the builder and his surveyor, as well as the previous three surveyors who have given us plats, which were all in agreement, all involved. Once we hear explanations from those four, we will go from there. I'll be sure and post updates on this thread. Thanks again to all of you have been helpful in our situation with your comments. This has been extremely stressful for us.
-J
One final note...(and this is aimed more at the general public) For those of you who saw the post yesterday where the person looked up the tax map coordinates (which I carelessly forgot to cover) and posted our physical street address: If you're thinking of paying us a visit, I would just like to mention that we have a home security system, a large German Shepherd, and enjoy our 2nd Amendment rights. That is all 😉
Ya'll is welcome to my campfire any time. Glad you joined, and posted.
Nate
Joanie,
There are other's on this board that could or have found out your address but it is/was not necessary to address your situation and no one else brought it up.
I will add something that you may not have picked out from some of the nuanced discussion. You are in Virginia, Virginia and the rest of the original Colonies are different from the rest of the United States when it comes to surveying. We, I am in PA, are in Colonial States and surveying and record keeping follow a generally English format. Title flowed from the King (Sovereign) and was granted in large tracts to super developers. Pennsylvania and Delaware were granted to William Penn, except for the most northerly part which was also granted to New York and Connecticut, another survey conflict which took years to resolve. Maryland was granted to Lord Baltimore and the line between PA and MD was in dispute prior to the American Revolution, so nothing is really new in your neighborhood. The King ended up sending Charles Mason and Jeremiah Dixon to survey the boundary line. It took them several years, 1763 to 1767. They first had to survey out a circle 12 miles around Wilmington, Delaware then South and East to cut off Delaware from Maryland. They then returned to the PA line and surveyed West. Knowing the best way to prevent future arguments they had rather large stone monuments shipped from England and then hauled them by wagon and set at every mile. The Mason Dixon line still has many of those original monuments in place after 249 years.
When Thomas Jefferson acquired Louisiana from the French he doubled the area of the United States. Already people were moving West from the original 13 Colonies into the land East of Louisiana which was acquired by England through the French and Indian Wars. Jefferson knew this vast amount of land had to be economically surveyed and divided and he created the Public Land Survey system, still in use today in most of the non-colonial states.
With different surveying systems come different laws and a different history on how those surveys and laws are interpreted.
Paul in PA
Paul in PA, post: 381596, member: 236 wrote:
... still in use today in most of the non-colonial states.Paul in PA
not in this here regal republic of hyperbolic pride!
Joanie, post: 381589, member: 11920 wrote: Thank you, Dougie. What you mentioned is exactly what we are looking for in a resolution - to keep the lot and land that we thought we were buying and was conveyed to us in our deed. As I mentioned in previous comments, the first plat I posted (12/09) is the one specifically referenced in our deed as the plat to the land we were buying. I feel like that should carry some kind of weight in this argument. I don't know, maybe it doesn't. That is our reason for wanting to consult a lawyer.
A couple of notes from this post and some of the other posts I read since I last posted.
First, no. NO surveyor can change the boundary of what you bought. The only disagreement is where what you bought falls. What you bought is on the deed and if it references a subdivision plat, that is what shows where you boundary is. The only discrepancy is the surveyors opinions of where your boundary falls. Also the original boundary monuments (if there are any) that were set by the original surveyor (the guy who created the subdivision plat and set the original corners.)
All following surveyors are there to survey their opinion of what the original surveyor/subdivision surveyor or original deed surveyor set in the ground. You are getting an 'expert' opinion as to your original boundary location when you hire a surveyor. No lawyer or any other profession can provide an expert opinion. That is what a surveyor does, and what he is licensed to do.
I don't see how a licensing board can come up with an expert opinion of which survey was right. They would only come in to play if there was gross negligence. In most disagreements on where the boundary is located, chances are that there is evidence to support both (or all) opinions as to where the corner falls. Some surveyors are sloppy and looking @ making a buck. Therein lies the problem. If you bring in a real professional, knowledgeable, surveyor, he will dig deep enough to cut through the conflicting evidence....and that will cost. But in a case like yours, you either need to resolve it, or agree with your neighbor as to where the property line should be. That is the most simple and cost-savings solution. You would want to talk to a good surveyor about creating a "boundary line agreement" and have him stake and write a description that defines your agreed-to line.
That is my opinion.
It sounds like you have been on the internet enough to know that silly people sometimes post silly things, and it looks like you can shake that off well enough. I'm glad to see that you aren't letting that influence your opinion of surveyors in general.
Well, Tom, you said:
Tom Adams, post: 381598, member: 7285 wrote: First, no. NO surveyor can change the boundary of what you bought.
When a Land Buyer buys land, they don't quite exactly ONLY buy with the deed. If they hire a survey done, and the survey has marks on the ground, and the grantor owns on BOTH sides of this line, then this can have considerable legal significance, EVEN IF THE WRITTEN TITLE is not quite the same, but is significantly similar.
What I mean, is the grantor cannot re-neg. And, the grantee would have some legal claim, even though their written title contains some defects.
A nation thrives on NON MOVING boundaries.
I am not saying it should not be addressed, in a legal fashion, (as you have suggested) I am saying that remedy should seriously consider what was SHOWN to the grantee. Because, the general public cannot be held to the same standard of comprehension, that a surveyor is. ie, the MONUMENTS shown are the deed, and the Deed IS the MONUMENT, or POINTS ON THE GROUND.
What we get, if we do not comprehend this, is FOREVER moving monuments, by some 0.01' or 0.04', or 0.10' or 0.15'. (or some 0.75") as in this case)
At some point, this nonsense has to stop, so PEOPLE can LIVE on the GROUND. And, we must address this problem, as a modification of the written title, rather than a modification of the monumentation.
At some point, (without fraud, or significant blunder) the MONUMENT is the ONLY deed the land user ever "sees". Because he TRUSTS the surveyor to make them identical. And, the fact that they are not quite identical, is not reason to move the only component that the land USER ever "Saw".
Sure, he signed some papers, but they were not "seen" the same way the monuments were "Seen".
Carry on. This is intended as "Thought Nutrition".
N
Kent McMillan, post: 381572, member: 3 wrote: RTK has been a magnet for this sort of thing, which is why "What is RTK?" is my final answer, Alex.
You are assuming facts not in evidence.
, post: 381607, member: 94 wrote: You are assuming facts not in evidence.
Well, the situation is apparently that several lots have been staked out in a translated location. That is easily done with RTK and not by layout with conventional methods. "What is RTK? Final answer, Alex."
, post: 381612, member: 3 wrote: Well, the situation is apparently that several lots have been staked out in a translated location. That is easily done with RTK and not by layout with conventional methods. "What is RTK? Final answer, Alex."
I was radial staking boundaries wrong for 20 years before GPS.
Nate The Surveyor, post: 381602, member: 291 wrote: Well, Tom, you said:
When a Land Buyer buys land, they don't quite exactly ONLY buy with the deed. If they hire a survey done, and the survey has marks on the ground, and the grantor owns on BOTH sides of this line, then this can have considerable legal significance, EVEN IF THE WRITTEN TITLE is not quite the same, but is significantly similar.
What I mean, is the grantor cannot re-neg. And, the grantee would have some legal claim, even though their written title contains some defects.
A nation thrives on NON MOVING boundaries.
I am not saying it should not be addressed, in a legal fashion, (as you have suggested) I am saying that remedy should seriously consider what was SHOWN to the grantee. Because, the general public cannot be held to the same standard of comprehension, that a surveyor is. ie, the MONUMENTS shown are the deed, and the Deed IS the MONUMENT, or POINTS ON THE GROUND.
What we get, if we do not comprehend this, is FOREVER moving monuments, by some 0.01' or 0.04', or 0.10' or 0.15'. (or some 0.75") as in this case)
At some point, this nonsense has to stop, so PEOPLE can LIVE on the GROUND. And, we must address this problem, as a modification of the written title, rather than a modification of the monumentation.
At some point, (without fraud, or significant blunder) the MONUMENT is the ONLY deed the land user ever "sees". Because he TRUSTS the surveyor to make them identical. And, the fact that they are not quite identical, is not reason to move the only component that the land USER ever "Saw".
Sure, he signed some papers, but they were not "seen" the same way the monuments were "Seen".Carry on. This is intended as "Thought Nutrition".
N
Hey Nate, you are under the assumption that I don't believe exactly what you said. Of COURSE original monuments (in their original position) hold. Saying that the deed is paramount does not dispute that opinion. Every surveyor's goal (I think) is to discover the original location of the boundary.
I am (was) trying to point out that the surveyor's who are retracing already-established corners are simply providing their expert opinion of that boundary location. I would have hoped you didn't think I was trying to place bearings and distance over physical evidence on the ground since you and I have been reading each other's posts for 20 years (more or less).
You the Man Nate!
Peter , post: 381614, member: 60 wrote: I was radial staking boundaries wrong for 20 years before GPS.
Yes, but it's unlikely that you were ending up with a TRANSLATION of the boundaries as staked out, i.e. in the right orientation, but uniformly shifted.
Monuments set in 2009 before construction then big yellow machines running around then streets (no centerline control) then various and sundry surveyors setting missing corners (or were they missing really) quickly using various theories, what could possibly go wrong?
This is why we have government supervision of subdivision monumentation in California, so that we have one Surveyor responsible for setting monuments after construction is completed. It tends to reduce the chaos resulting from piecemeal efforts by too many cooks (surveyors).
Kent McMillan, post: 381616, member: 3 wrote: Yes, but it's unlikely that you were ending up with a TRANSLATION of the boundaries as staked out, i.e. in the right orientation, but uniformly shifted.
Bad setup.
Carl B. Correll, post: 381426, member: 13 wrote: Joanie,
I've been looking at this thread for a few days and thought that I'd finally jump in. I am licensed and practice in Virginia, but have NEVER once set up my instrument north of Roanoke County or City, so I have nothing... ZERO to do with any of these plats. AND, I won't be part of any litigation, I just won't. I think you're somewhere up along the I-66 corridor or maybe Rte. 7 (maybe Loudoun County), but I'm not sure. That being said, here's what I think has happened.
First, the subdivision plat (or neighborhood plat).
This is a fairly common looking plat for my area/region/state/commonwealth. The solid balls at the corners are not called out individually because somewhere in the notes there is probably a generalized note stating "(size?) Iron (Rod/Pipe) Set at all lot corners, PC's/PT's, Points of Street Deflection, unless otherwise noted". The "0.5' S/W easement " is a new one on me, but like a previous poster said, it very likely a sidewalk. S/W is probably shown in the notes. These are small lots. I just dealt with this recently in my town. A A/E/S design company did a whole subdivision, and probably set all of their lot monumentation BEFORE all of the utilities and drainage structures were in place. Well, developers don't like to pay for stuff twice, and (probably) in both of these situations, the monuments were put in, and the dirt movers couldn't avoid hitting ALL of them trying to shoehorn in everything that has to go into the easement. But then, most, if not all of the front corners are lost. The locality (at least here doesn't) doesn't make anybody go back and make sure that the lot corners are in place when the soil and utility and drainage structures are done being installed. No locality that I know of makes anybody set centerline PC/PT/Intersection monuments after asphalt has been laid either... NONE. So, now you have a great looking paper survey, where things may have been put into the ground perfect at the outset, but nothing remains after because the developer is cheap, the design firm bid low and the locality has no standards in place to make sure things are done RIGHT and stuff is in the ground in the end. And this is before the first house it built.Now, what is probably happening, or while this is going on, the developer is selling lots to contractors, or may be one themself and is having the design firm come back and set foundation stakes for individual lots. The design firm has secret (internal/non-published) traverse control to set everything by, but they've already set things once, why spend the time to set things again? Who's going to pay for it? So, they set what the contractor asks for: Foundations and stakes for fences on these postage stamp lots. And, that's what they'll get, but not much else. But anyway, let's move on.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And now you have this thing:
I have no idea what this thing is. It looks like some sort of grading/topo plan that the community requires. These are not common in my area. This is not a real survey in my opinion. Notice the House Data (elevations), this is a vertical survey, not a horizontal one. Notice that there are no corners called out, it only refers to boundary information in the notes. "Building dimensions are for permit only", doesn't say it's an actual structure. The notes also seem to indicate that a third party (Clifford & Associates) also provided some information. Since the drafting style is different that the subdivision plat, I think it's still another firm involved. I took the time to look up Lavelle & Associates and they had this on their link:
"Offering the following professional land surveying services to the five state area (Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia, & Delaware).
ALTA / ACSM Land Title Surveys, As-Built Surveys, Boundary Surveys, Cell Tower Site Plans, Condominium Plats, Construction Stake-Out Surveys, Easement Plans,Existing Conditions Surveys,FAA 1-A & 2-C Survey Certifications, FEMA Elevation Certificates, FEMA Letter of Map Amendment (LOMA), GPS Surveying, Health Department Site Plans, Location Surveys, Metes and Bounds Descriptions, Mortgage Surveys, Photo-Topographic Surveys, Plats of Survey, Subdivision Plats, Wall Check Surveys"And then they even have this special PAGE as a disclaimer for "LOCATION SURVEYS". I will tell you that Mortgage Loan Inspections/Drive-by's/ETC. are not legal in Virginia, but I'm not familiar with the practices of professionals in other areas of the Commonwealth. I will say that I don't know of ANYONE doing drive-by's in my area. We do "Physical Surveys" and they can be on the quick side, but, they are a real survey in my eyes.
Also, where somebody mentioned that they thought it was weird that all the lines on the smaller lot plats were exactly the same as the subdivision plat, that is SOP in all areas that I work. If irons and such are within certain (personal or local) tolerance, you just take it and go. I'm talking within a 0.1'å± or so. In fact, on our regs for "Physical Surveys" can be found here. Take special notice of this entry:
C. The plat reflecting the work product shall be drawn to scale and shall show the following, unless requested otherwise by the client and so noted on the plat:
1. The bearings and distances for the boundaries and the area of the lot or parcel of land shall be shown in accordance with record data, unless a current, new land boundary survey has been performed in conjunction with the physical improvements survey. If needed to produce a closed polygon, the meander lines necessary to verify locations of streams, tidelands, lakes and swamps shall be shown. All bearings shall be shown in a clockwise direction, unless otherwise indicated.A lot of surveyors, including me, will find a way to make is all fit within tolerance. It promotes harmony in the neighborhood. Does it always happen? NO, but it's best to try.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Now, on to this last thing:
This thing is THREADBARE, and I'll leave it at that.
Now, as to the issue of the planted pines, be happy that they are 1' off at a minimum. Next thing is to try to deal with your neighbor as calmly and friendly as you can. I don't think you need a lawyer or real estate agent at this point. You need a surveyor that will work with you AND your neighbor to find out what the true status of the property lines are. DON'T start flinging bad words and insults and threats around, you might need them in the near future.
Find a surveyor that you both trust (that might take a couple of tries), and it might be the original subdivision surveyor (see below) . Explain to the surveyor your concerns. Show him this message board thread. BE STRAIGHT UP WITH THEM! Because, once you find out what the actual situation is, you and your neighbor can assess what's next. They can build the fence, you can do what you need to do with your pine trees, etc. But, you might need to adjust a property line, in which case you'll need your neighbor to agree. At that point a lawyer might need to be consulted for a deed, but maybe not until then.
Original Subdivision Surveyor explanation: I mention the original surveyor, because maybe they have some of that super secret hidden control that they can work off of, but, maybe not. But, you need to know if there also might be two sets of corners in the ground or sidewalk. I probably should have inserted that earlier. If there are two sets of marks on the sidewalk, then yes, another surveyor might need to be found. T
There's no real good answers here at this point. BUT, THE TRUTH IS OUT THERE!!! Good Luck!!
~~~~~~~~~~~
Also, as an aside, here's what one of my "Physical Survey" plats looks like for comparative reasons. I called it a "Plat Of Survey" because I had to call a line different that what was of record on the subdivision plat, because the S/D plat did't close mathematically. I did find all of the lot corners, so from that aspect, it was a slam dunk.
I guess it's a colonial thing. Seems your SOPs are the same as around here. Your area sounds very similar
Thanks Tom...
I kinda thought it was where you stood, but i wanted to keep all the dear readers on that page too!
It's just good to find new and clear ways to keep this clear. Many newcomers in this profession, need this issue made plain.
Nate
By our very nature, surveyors love order. What Joanie has described is disorder. Our inner selves demand that disorder be stamped out no matter where it raises its ugly head. That is why there are over 150 comments to the original post and thousands of views. None of us can fix the problem from where we are, physically, but the mere fact that the problem exists makes us want to be part of the solution.
My worry is that none of the survey field work on any of the various survey projects in the subdivision have had the signing licensed land surveyor present directing and/or performing the work. Furthermore, I worry that none of the company owners were ever present, with the possible exception of the first one who was escorted to the raw site by the developer on their way to the golf course for a friendly afternoon of pasture pool and spirits. I worry that too many have become risk-based providers who know the odds are in their favor when it comes to potential claims that will directly come out of their personal income. The percentage of survey projects that force a license holder to go to court to defend himself is minuscule, as it should be if we are truly living up to the standard of ethics that we hold high but not because the clients are ignorant.
Nate The Surveyor, post: 381602, member: 291 wrote: Well, Tom, you said:
When a Land Buyer buys land, they don't quite exactly ONLY buy with the deed. If they hire a survey done, and the survey has marks on the ground, and the grantor owns on BOTH sides of this line, then this can have considerable legal significance, EVEN IF THE WRITTEN TITLE is not quite the same, but is significantly similar.
What I mean, is the grantor cannot re-neg. And, the grantee would have some legal claim, even though their written title contains some defects.
A nation thrives on NON MOVING boundaries.
I am not saying it should not be addressed, in a legal fashion, (as you have suggested) I am saying that remedy should seriously consider what was SHOWN to the grantee. Because, the general public cannot be held to the same standard of comprehension, that a surveyor is. ie, the MONUMENTS shown are the deed, and the Deed IS the MONUMENT, or POINTS ON THE GROUND.
What we get, if we do not comprehend this, is FOREVER moving monuments, by some 0.01' or 0.04', or 0.10' or 0.15'. (or some 0.75") as in this case)
At some point, this nonsense has to stop, so PEOPLE can LIVE on the GROUND. And, we must address this problem, as a modification of the written title, rather than a modification of the monumentation.
At some point, (without fraud, or significant blunder) the MONUMENT is the ONLY deed the land user ever "sees". Because he TRUSTS the surveyor to make them identical. And, the fact that they are not quite identical, is not reason to move the only component that the land USER ever "Saw".
Sure, he signed some papers, but they were not "seen" the same way the monuments were "Seen".Carry on. This is intended as "Thought Nutrition".
N
We have an old case which describes a similar situation, Price v. De Reyes, 161 Cal. 484 (1911), in which De Reyes acquired a parcel on Cahuenga Avenue just north of Sunset in Los Angeles. The Grantor (also Price's predecessor) pointed out the corners of the parcel and De Reyes set a pipe at each corner. The pipes marked out the correct sized parcel but it was shifted 18" north from where the Deed measurements indicated it should be located. After many years Price became De Reyes's adjoiner on the north; upon a Survey, Price discovered the conflict and sued De Reyes. Price prevailed, De Reyes moved for a new trial and was denied. Justice Shaw reversed the order denying a new trial saying that De Reyes should have prevailed on Agreed Boundary and Adverse Possession theories but those are really just mechanisms the Courts use to implement simple justice as you describe, common sense really.
Mark Mayer, post: 381466, member: 424 wrote: It seems to me that two surveyors have already been hired and at least one of them has caused the problem. Will a third come up with a third solution? How is the property owner supposed to know which is right? Will the neighbor accept the results of a third survey if it doesn't agree with the survey he paid for? I'm thinking that escalating this to the state board level may be the only way to truly get to the bottom of the matter.
I invite you to go online and read the minutes from Oregon State Board Law Enforcement Committee minutes. Just randomly pick a month and read the minutes. You may reconsider your statement "escalating this to the state board level may be the only way to truly get to the bottom of the matter". My 2 cents, Jp
Tom Adams, post: 381598, member: 7285 wrote: A couple of notes from this post and some of the other posts I read since I last posted.
But in a case like yours, you either need to resolve it, or agree with your neighbor as to where the property line should be. That is the most simple and cost-savings solution. You would want to talk to a good surveyor about creating a "boundary line agreement" and have him stake and write a description that defines your agreed-to line.
Let's not jump to conclusions folks and confuse things. Boundary Line Agreements are appropriate when there is truly conflicting evidence that can't be resolved by survey. We don't know that this is the case.
Jp7191, post: 381646, member: 1617 wrote: I invite you to go online and read the minutes from Oregon State Board Law Enforcement Committee minutes....
For a period of time a few years back I regularly attended Oregon state board meetings as an observer for the Pioneer Chapter of PLSO. As a result I still get the minutes mailed to me every month. I'll say that the board meetings, as reflected by the minutes, is not where the action is. It's in the investigations. There is a lot going on just under the surface.
