AREA OF CONFLICTING DEEDS
:good:
Good post JB.
My only reason for commenting, is that I don't like the idea of someone stopping a job with a 'routine' ambiguity and, instead of doing the most efficient solution and making a professional judgment, stopping everything and working on an owner-resolution that might just be easy enough to show a plat of what you did and why.
Confusing? An example might be that I find an uncalled-for rebar that, in my professional judgment I accept. I see no significant evidence to reject it. I might show it as the actual property corner on my plat (and/or put my cap on it if the law so requires) and produce the plat and charge my incredibly fair and balanced wage. As opposed to trying to make a killing on getting the neighbors together and saying that this monument is not of record, and the math puts it over there 0.1' and lets write up this boundary-line agreement (or worse, go through an official county-approved boundary line adjustment) to the pin.
I could even see someone using JB Stahl's writeups to justify such an action. That is the main reason I make my point. We must measure (intellectualy measure) the ambiguity and decide if it is significant enough that there are more than one justifiable solutions and that my actions might save the clients a great amount of future litigation and headache. For instance, I would guess that if there are more than one property pin that were set to represent a corner, then there are probably more than one "justifiable" solution to the position of the corner.
AREA OF CONFLICTING DEEDS
Excellent post, Tom. You're absolutely right. While the CYA notes can too often be used as an excuse not to derive a professional opinion, so too, a simple ambiguity or conflict in the evidence can also be too often used as an excuse not to express an opinion as well. Routine ambiguities do happen all the time, and most are handled by the surveyor with a simple correction or notation. That's what we do and we're comfortable with it.
I'd say, that's the real test... are you comfortable with making a decision? If so, then make it and get the job done. If not, then step back, give it some time, ruminate on it, then decide what approach to take. Surveying isn't black and white. There are a lot of options available. Not every ambiguity requires a boundary agreement to resolve. In fact, very few do. Depends upon the ambiguity and it's impact. Are you fixing an assessor's map? Or, are you fixing a typo that no one has a problem with? Are there truly two lines on the ground? Or, are there only two possibilities? Each problem has a different resolution.
If we're worried about what CYA note to put on the drawing, then we likely haven't resolved the problem to our own satisfaction.
Thanks, Tom, for pointing that out.
JBS
AREA OF CONFLICTING DEEDS
The number one reason to read this board, is threads like this.
Thank you John, and all of the other good people that post hear.
I'm currently working on a boundary survey in a 1981 plat. 1/4 acre lots, original monuments in the street, found 3 front corners that fit those monuments within 0.02 feet. When I go to the back I find 2 original plat corners, but they are off, almost a foot. They are only 32' a part and are off by .9'.
Going back out today and see if I can't find some cooperating evidence. The real issue is the 6' retaining wall and Cedar trees that are on my clients property that the neighbor thinks are his.
A few years ago, I might've asked you to wish me luck. I don't need luck today, I have all of the tools I need right here.
I hope everyone's day turns out as good as mine.
Dugger
FLS
> > Funny thing is, I just looked at the Tax Map I was referring to and it says,
> >
> > "IN CONTENTION"
> >
> > Don't know where I got the Area of Conflicting Deeds from.
> >
> > EDIT: I guess you can't read it, but the triangular area says, "IN CONTENTION 3.3 acres"
>
> I'd say the tax map is pretty "in-your-face" about the need for a professional to step up and help resolve whatever problem caused this supposed "contention." Also, if it's really "in contention," why aren't both lines dashed? Seems the assessor has taken sides.
>
> JBS
>
> PS Is it really a "contention," or is it just some ambiguity or conflicting evidence that hasn't been resolved? "Contention" means that there is some build-up of animosity between the owners.
No animosity, no contention. My parcel (the big one - 103 acres) was clearcut right up to the old wire fence before I bought it. The other lot has an old camp a long ways away and he has never approached me about the issue. It is obvious (on the ground) where the line is. I don't really care either way. The value of this remote land is not really worth the price of the survey (even though I can get it cheap)
BTW: On the ground, the area of contention is mine.
The other funny thing is; when they re-did the tax maps, they (Incorrectly) gave my smaller lot (25 acres) an additional 250' of road frontage and increased my acreage (on the smaller yellow lot) by 2 acres making it 27 acres.
FLS
All our tax maps say that by way of the general note "not to be used for survey purposes", or something like that. "Areas of confusion" that the mappers have specific problems with merely get a question mark usually. Gotta love those jobs that start with a question mark on the tax parcel:)
But your situation here seems worth addressing. Essentially you have a publicly stated claim against a portion of "your property" (based on your occupation and the old fence). I would ask the tax mappers to remove it, in writing, just to CYA. Unless it's truly worthless and you would just as soon the line were where the dashed line is.
AREA OF CONFLICTING DEEDS
Yes, resolving the ambiguity is what surveyors get paid for. If I followed JB's advice my clients would not have to pay me, based on the contract I use.
Now, if your contract says you will find problems, not resolve them, turn the whole mess in to the client and require they make some legal agreement without an attorney; then I guess you could still get paid:)
AREA OF CONFLICTING DEEDS
> Yes, resolving the ambiguity is what surveyors get paid for. If I followed JB's advice my clients would not have to pay me, based on the contract I use.
>
> Now, if your contract says you will find problems, not resolve them, turn the whole mess in to the client and require they make some legal agreement without an attorney; then I guess you could still get paid:)
BINGO!!! It's all in the contract, Duane. Most surveyors contract to do the survey, then get paid, and they fail to provide for contingencies. Instead of making more money when things go south, they end up losing more money instead. My contract doesn't say that I will find problems. And, my contract doesn't say that I'll fix them, either. I really don't care if they have an attorney or not. That doesn't affect my findings or my duty. In fact, I usually make more money when the attorneys are involved. They're not necessary, however, in most boundary determination or mediation. That's what surveyors do.
What my contract does have, however, is a provision stating that "if" or "when" I discover any uncertainty, ambiguity, or dispute regarding the boundary, I will, 1) stop work, and 2) notify the client. I will then inform the client regarding the nature of the discovery and will discuss possible remedies. We can negotiate what steps to take, how long that will take and how much that will cost. I can then issue an addendum outlining our discussion and can proceed to do the additional work.
Once completed, the additional work will either uncover the evidence necessary to resolve the problem, or it won't. If it does, I can finish the job at the originally contracted price (plus the addendum, of course). If it doesn't, then we'll discuss other possible remedies and negotiate further work. The client is free to halt the contract at any time and pay me for the work to-date. That's a standard cancellation clause. I'll archive the file and we can finish the work later, or I'll be happy to turn the work over to another surveyor of their choosing.
Once the resolution is reached (to my satisfaction) then I will proceed to complete the survey at the originally agreed-upon price. Most surveys should never see the stop clause in effect. When it does become necessary, however, I've had that period of time be anywhere from a few hours of research to nearly ten years leading up to litigation. It's involved scrivener's affidavits, owner's affidavits, boundary agreements, boundary adjustments, settlement agreements, mediation, arbitration, and litigation. Makes no difference to me, I'm in the game until it's resolved. It's just a service I provide as a professional land surveyor.
Either way, I get paid for the additional work performed, and I don't finish the survey until I am satisfied with the resolution of the boundaries. I don't care if it takes $200 to resolve it or $20,000. That's up to the nature of the problem and the nature of the landowners. One thing for certain, the landowner will pay for my expertise. I don't give it away for free.
JBS
AREA OF CONFLICTING DEEDS
Maybe it's just that New Yorkers are contentious, they want me to give them an opinion on the location of the boundary line. It's what they think surveyors do. I do all the rest too, but that's where all my clients want me to start. I don't know where they get these strange ideas but I have to work with them.
AREA OF CONFLICTING DEEDS
> Maybe it's just that New Yorkers are contentious, they want me to give them an opinion on the location of the boundary line.
I don't have any problem with that, whatsoever, Duane. That's what surveyors do. We locate boundary lines.
What I won't do, is guess where the boundary goes in spite of conflicts and ambiguities. Another thing I won't do is volunteer to do the research necessary to resolve the conflicts for free. I also won't pass the "loss" on to some other person who has a parcel that can be surveyed with little cost.
We all know there are the majority of surveys which are routine. You give a price, get the job, and finish the job. What do you do when you run across one of "those" jobs which are going to require two days at the court house, another three days making phone calls and meeting with prior owners, another two days of field work to tie down the controlling monuments within a nine-block perimeter, etc., etc.
Most surveyors seem satisfied to simply guess, finish the survey, place a CYA note on the drawing about the boundaries being all f'd up, take their check and run. I refuse to leave a landowner in the lurch with no option but calling an attorney and spending $20k to $40k suing their neighbor when I could have fixed it better for half the cost (all while maintaining neighbor relations). Heck, by the time I'm done, the neighbor will probably help out with the cost! Landowners (both of them) get a real bargain!
What's the down side?
JBS
