roger_LS, post: 381659, member: 11550 wrote: 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.
that is defiantly a matter of Jurisdiction.
I am curious about this as I only work in one state and mostly one County. Do you mean that a jurisdiction can require a line of agreement when there is no conflict in evidence and no disagreement between Surveyor's?
roger_LS, post: 381682, member: 11550 wrote: I am curious about this as I only work in one state and mostly one County. Do you mean that a jurisdiction can require a line of agreement when there is no conflict in evidence and no disagreement between Surveyor's?
It depends if your State is an objective uncertainty State or a subjective uncertainty State. I would class Virginia as an objective uncertainty State.
In subjective uncertainty States (such as California) the property owners are not required to get a Survey. The only thing required is that they are uncertain, that is they don't know where the boundary is located. The adjoining owners don't have to get a Survey to find out; all they have to do is be mutually uncertain and mutually agree to establish their boundary in order to resolve their uncertainty. An actual dispute is not usually required.
PS: In California, Martin vs. Van Bergen appears to announce California is an objective uncertainty State but it has been ignored by at least one case following it. I believe this is based on a mis-reading of Bryant vs. Blevins, the California Supreme Court's last pronouncement in a boundary dispute case.
Dave Karoly, post: 381696, member: 94 wrote: It depends if your State is an objective uncertainty State or a subjective uncertainty State. I would class Virginia as an objective uncertainty State.
In subjective uncertainty States (such as California) the property owners are not required to get a Survey. The only thing required is that they are uncertain, that is they don't know where the boundary is located. The adjoining owners don't have to get a Survey to find out; all they have to do is be mutually uncertain and mutually agree to establish their boundary in order to resolve their uncertainty. An actual dispute is not usually required.
PS: In California, Martin vs. Van Bergen appears to announce California is an objective uncertainty State but it has been ignored by at least one case following it. I believe this is based on a mis-reading of Bryant vs. Blevins, the California Supreme Court's last pronouncement in a boundary dispute case.
Hi Dave,
Which following case ignored martin v van Bergen?
thanks,
clearcut, post: 381705, member: 297 wrote: Hi Dave,
Which following case ignored martin v van Bergen?
thanks,
Soroush-Azar v. Palmer (unpublished), 2013 WL 5293692 (the Westlaw cite), appears to be a subjective uncertainty case (San Diego County). It appears to be in conflict with Martin on the subjective vs objective uncertainty question. The Trial Court ruled it is an agreed boundary and the Appellate Court affirmed.
Boulder skies Limited Partnership v. Prazma (unpublished), 2014 WL 1087875 (San Diego County), also was ruled an agreed boundary but I see it as an objective uncertainty case.
Thanks Dave, that explains why I missed it/them. I don't generally review the unpublished cases as they're issued unless its one I have some prior knowledge of.
roger_LS, post: 381659, member: 11550 wrote: 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.
If two different surveyors are coming up with two different locations for the same property, (and they have both set monuments) there is absolutely conflicting evidence. Spending thousands to resolve the difference might be a waste of money for a conflicting line that is only worth much less per acre. In my opinion, a Boundary Line Agreement is made for this exact type of situation, to peacefully economically resolve a uncertain boundary line. Anything other than this is a waste of money and needlessly putting a lot of dollars into lawyers and/or surveyors pockets. The only question in my mind is whether you can reach an agreement with you neighbor.
Tom Adams, post: 381731, member: 7285 wrote: The only question in my mind is whether you can reach an agreement with you neighbor.
You mean "reach an agreement with you, your neighbor, your mortgage lender and your neighbor's mortgage lender" don't you? I trust you realize that you're probably signing up for filing an amended plat with structures on it that may or may not conform to the applicable zoning ordinances, too. A boundary agreement in a modern urban subdivision is generally an exceptionally bad solution to problems such as the OP described.
Tom Adams, post: 381731, member: 7285 wrote: If two different surveyors are coming up with two different locations for the same property, (and they have both set monuments) there is absolutely conflicting evidence. Spending thousands to resolve the difference might be a waste of money for a conflicting line that is only worth much less per acre. In my opinion, a Boundary Line Agreement is made for this exact type of situation, to peacefully economically resolve a uncertain boundary line. Anything other than this is a waste of money and needlessly putting a lot of dollars into lawyers and/or surveyors pockets. The only question in my mind is whether you can reach an agreement with you neighbor.
I absolutely agree, initiating lines of agreement are great when there is conflict and uncertainty that can't be resolved by survey or would be prohibitively expensive. I've used them a number of times. I'm just pointing out that in this example, we really don't know what is going on yet. This could be a case of some field techs flinging out points in the wrong place.
Well, you guys are probably right, that too many noses get involved in Boundary Line Agreements. In theory, if two people are uncertain of their common line they can reach an agreement on where it falls, and they can describe that location and sign an agreement to that effect. The County shouldn't have any say, the surveyor doesn't have to be involved, and if they bring one on board s/he should only be involved with writing up the location of the agreed-on line and shouldn't have any influence on where they agree to put it. I agree, if the bank/lender actually holds the note, they might have some leverage.
However the agreement does not change the line or the "legal" area of the properties and it doesn't transfer any land. It merely 'fixes" where the uncertain line between the neighbors. The County Clerk shouldn't have any say if you bring in a signed boundary line agreement and record it for the public records. The Planning department shouldn't even be involved because, again, the agreement does not move the property line. It is not a Boundary Line Adjustment
In this case, from what I understand two different surveyors placed the corners in different locations. If one of he surveyors just stamps the work of his field guys 'flinging" his property pins to wherever they land, he is at fault and his license to practice should be taken away. That work is under his direct responsibility and control. Land owners should be able to rely on their Surveyor's expert opinion and it isn't their fault if the surveyor they hire is incompetent.
P.S.(if you want some ammunition to slap me around with) I have never prepared a boundary line agreement and am not a lawyer. Only discussing theory here.
Give me a break! The subdivision is seven years old and construction is not yet complete. Absent revised map filings or gross errors on the map filed, there can only be one location for every lot corner. If final monuments have not been set, these disagreeing surveyors may well have started from points set by others who did incomplete diligence. I do note that specific addresses do not Google up consistently along the street. Absent concrete monuments at specific corners the street itself may be the best available monument.
On my survey in an incomplete subdivision I mentioned here a few days ago, I found the curb faces to be within tenths of design location. On the SW rear pin by which I was held for the geometry it is 125.00' to lot corner and 1335.05 to face of curb. From the SE corner, calc corner to front corner 134.43', calc corner to face of curb 144.17' and found pin to face of curb 144.21'.
Were the map making surveyor to come back and set the monuments after completion of the roadway, am I the original surveyor or is he?
Paul in PA
2 things for this morning.
1.) Consider how you'd feel, if this were you, who bought this lot, with several surveys. How would you like to be out money, because somebody else was lazy/incompetent, or failed in their EXPECTED duty? (now, granted, it MAY be the builder, or developer here, who is actually at the root of the trouble, by circumventing proper procedure). We DON'T know WHO is at fault yet. All we know is that there IS a problem.
2.) Consider how much dis agreement there is amongst surveyors, that are on display here.
Now, granted, we as surveyors HAVE the tools in our education, and expertise with fine modern surveying equipment that we have at our disposal.
What I think this is a symptom of, is a general state of compromise, due to fierce pressure to "Get 'er done, fast and cheap", And, that pushes our integrity to the max.... (down to the WRONG end of the box!) Think about what a mess this would/could be, if 20 years had rolled along, and various surveys had been done, some on this datum, and some on that.
I think it is incredibly fortunate that Joanie, found it FRESH off the Surveyor's hammer (Where he monuments are fresh) and that she came here, and is delving into the mess now. And, I can see how that very act alone, can make some surveyors "nervous". It would me, if I were one of the involved surveyors. Now, as a matter of FACT, it may ultimately be found that the SURVEYORS are not at fault.... but we don't know yet. (I have seen developers out setting corners, because either the surveyor wanted money, or time, to do it).
I hope 2 things come out of this.
1.) That Joanie gets to the bottom of this, and that she gets to either keep the old line, and/or gets compensated for her expenses and troubles, to get to the bottom of it, and is "satisfied". (It's hard to be fully satisfied, when finger pointing is going on, and nobody really steps to the plate, and says, they will take care of the problem)
2.) That surveyors who routinely practice, without the FULL picture in front of them, will be encouraged to do so.
That's all!
N
PS, I have many new tick and chigger bites, from a long day in the field yesterday!! May God fry those buggers! 🙂
Have a great day.
Suppose someone buys a house in Fast and Cheap Acres and a year later a section of the second floor comes loose and sags along a wall.
Would the Structural Engineers on the Structural Engineering forum suggest the new homeowner hire a Forensic Structural Engineer at great cost to go study all of the houses in the subdivision to find out what may have caused the floor to break free?
A member of the public purchased a Lot in a platted subdivision which was surveyed at least twice following the original survey. They have an expectation that the professionals that were hired will mark out the lot described in the Deed accurately. They don't really care exactly who drove the rebar into the ground, whether it was the LS or a technician, doesn't matter to them. The Structural Engineer doesn't personally drive all the nails required on a sheer wall; it must be done, if it doesn't get done then someone in responsibility is liable whether it is the Engineer's inadequate design or the Contractor not following the plans.
I taught an Attorney to fly airplanes, he specialized in construction defects. The client would come to him with a problem and he had all the professional experts on call to investigate and find out what happened. The key is getting the right Attorney with experience in this area.
Dave Karoly, post: 381762, member: 94 wrote: I taught an Attorney to fly airplanes, he specialized in construction defects. The client would come to him with a problem and he had all the professional experts on call to investigate and find out what happened. The key is getting the right Attorney with experience in this area.
I'd say that the odds of finding the right surveyor are much better than of finding the right attorney. There are probably at least twenty lawyers for every licensed surveyor within an hour's drive of the property in question.
Kent McMillan, post: 381773, member: 3 wrote: I'd say that the odds of finding the right surveyor are much better than of finding the right attorney. There are probably at least twenty lawyers for every licensed surveyor within an hour's drive of the property in question.
The Surveyor's reaction is to advise the property owner to hire a Surveyor, find out what is going on.
But that is like hiring a contractor to rebuild your brand new house that just fell down or hiring a mechanic yourself to fix the transmission on your brand new car that fell out as you drove off of the lot the first time. Would any reasonable person do that? Heck no, first you go to the developer and say, "Fix it or else!" It isn't the property owner's responsibility to clean up this mess.
Nate The Surveyor, post: 381760, member: 291 wrote: 2 things for this morning.
1.) Consider how you'd feel, if this were you, who bought this lot, with several surveys. How would you like to be out money, because somebody else was lazy/incompetent, or failed in their EXPECTED duty? (now, granted, it MAY be the builder, or developer here, who is actually at the root of the trouble, by circumventing proper procedure). We DON'T know WHO is at fault yet. All we know is that there IS a problem.
2.) Consider how much dis agreement there is amongst surveyors, that are on display here.
Now, granted, we as surveyors HAVE the tools in our education, and expertise with fine modern surveying equipment that we have at our disposal.
What I think this is a symptom of, is a general state of compromise, due to fierce pressure to "Get 'er done, fast and cheap", And, that pushes our integrity to the max.... (down to the WRONG end of the box!) Think about what a mess this would/could be, if 20 years had rolled along, and various surveys had been done, some on this datum, and some on that.
I think it is incredibly fortunate that Joanie, found it FRESH off the Surveyor's hammer (Where he monuments are fresh) and that she came here, and is delving into the mess now. And, I can see how that very act alone, can make some surveyors "nervous". It would me, if I were one of the involved surveyors. Now, as a matter of FACT, it may ultimately be found that the SURVEYORS are not at fault.... but we don't know yet. (I have seen developers out setting corners, because either the surveyor wanted money, or time, to do it).I hope 2 things come out of this.
1.) That Joanie gets to the bottom of this, and that she gets to either keep the old line, and/or gets compensated for her expenses and troubles, to get to the bottom of it, and is "satisfied". (It's hard to be fully satisfied, when finger pointing is going on, and nobody really steps to the plate, and says, they will take care of the problem)
2.) That surveyors who routinely practice, without the FULL picture in front of them, will be encouraged to do so.
That's all!
N
PS, I have many new tick and chigger bites, from a long day in the field yesterday!! May God fry those buggers! 🙂
Have a great day.
You are assuming that plans or maps are surveys on the ground. At least two of them are not.
Lines and text on paper do not guarantee a true boundary survey, and the uninformed are every often confused or missled by what they see.
David Karoly sees a mess, I see an opportunity to clarify what is true.
Paul in PA
Dave Karoly, post: 381775, member: 94 wrote: The Surveyor's reaction is to advise the property owner to hire a Surveyor, find out what is going on.
But that is like hiring a contractor to rebuild your brand new house that just fell down or hiring a mechanic yourself to fix the transmission on your brand new car that fell out as you drove off of the lot the first time. Would any reasonable person do that? Heck no, first you go to the developer and say, "Fix it or else!" It isn't the property owner's responsibility to clean up this mess.
From a purely practical standpoint, this isn't a problem anywhere near a house falling down. One or both of the recent surveyors came up with the wrong answer and all that needs to be done is to identify which is incorrect, what the right answer is, and take it from there. The wrong surveyor should be thrilled to pay the cost of the forensic survey instead of facing a complaint to the licensing board. If improvements have been incorrectly located and are shown to be into setbacks or some other problem to have been created, then it's more complicated.
Just throwing money at an attorney and expecting writing demand letters is going to accomplish much seems unrealistic as a way to solve the problem.
Kent McMillan, post: 381778, member: 3 wrote: From a purely practical standpoint, this isn't a problem anywhere near a house falling down. One or both of the recent surveyors came up with the wrong answer and all that needs to be done is to identify which is incorrect, what the right answer is, and take it from there. The wrong surveyor should be thrilled to pay the cost of the forensic survey instead of facing a complaint to the licensing board. If improvements have been incorrectly located and are shown to be into setbacks or some other problem to have been created, then it's more complicated.
Just throwing money at an attorney and expecting writing demand letters is going to accomplish much seems unrealistic as a way to solve the problem.
The first thing you do is go to the developer and tell them to fix the surveying mess; there is a reason there is two versions of the boundaries. I wouldn't bother with Attorneys at first. If the trees which are of concern turn out to be on the neighbor's lot, and they are on Joanie's side of the monuments she relied on, then that Surveyor owes her some trees or at least their value. If everyone stonewalls then an Attorney with a reputation of winning construction defect lawsuits in that State is the one to get. The right Attorney will get it done. A friend had a very bad accident, somehow by the grace of God no one was killed but it was bad (tire blowout rollover-the right passenger door was torn off-the right passenger was badly hurt but not killed, just by luck). He somehow got on the client list of the Attorney that has a nationwide reputation for beating giant corporations. He said that guy walked in the room and 5 minutes later giant auto corporation was begging to settle. Just get the local bulldog who wins cases.
I agree just some general practice attorney with no reputation writing letters to people will accomplish nothing. The Attorney business is mostly built on rep, like the Mafia.
Dave Karoly, post: 381783, member: 94 wrote: The first thing you do is go to the developer and tell them to fix the surveying mess; there is a reason there is two versions of the boundaries. I wouldn't bother with Attorneys at first.
The problem is that the builder may have some liability if the house is improperly located and would have a motive to try to sweep the whole business under the rug by doing something quite a bit less than a real fix. It all depends upon the facts that only a correct survey can disclose.
My gut reaction, being that this is a modern survey is that we have a basic mistake here, not some kind of global problem with original control in the sub. If that's the case, a competent surveyor should be able to easily identify the problem, show the facts to who ever blew it and that the surveyor in error would admit the mistake, and revise his survey, end of story, end of problem. No Line of agreement, lot line adjustment, no attorneys needed.