I'm surveying a piece of property my client bought out of an estate 5 years ago. He has a Personal Representative's Deed; the attorney copied and pasted the description out of the Assessor's web page...
Am I the only one that sees this as a potential problem? Or at least a headache?
What is the potential liability for a surveyor that needs to deal with things like this?
Douglas
The description in the PRD is just part of the picture. The liability is the same as every other job. It's what we do...
A few years ago there was a similar case of a conveyance (from a trust, post- probate to a family member) that only included the assessor's truncated BS description. The fly in the ointment was the assessor's description did NOT include a 'common' area adjacent to the property, which was most likely actually meant to be conveyed...but the assessor's AREA in acreage seemed to include the land. The land in question was NOT included (area wise) in any other tax account.
The big problem with the subsequent law suit was the grantee tried to claim the description was ambiguous and really did include the land in question. The courts found the description was not ambiguous just because the description and area did not jive. It boiled down to a question of the intent of a deceased person and his last will & testament.
A surveyor was hired (not me) to locate the boundary. Being a proficient surveyor, he researched the property and found a conveyance that included the entire description. That survey was not admissible in the proceedings because the surveyor had used a description that was extraneous to the conveyance in question. While it turned into a huge gnat-fugg, everything was eventually settled.
Long story short, stay the hell away from assessor's descriptions that wind up on conveyance documents. Making the assumption what is described on the face of the document and what a previous deed says are the same can be hard to prove in a court of law.
The lazy attorney that does not include a proper description in the tax sales deeds should be liable for all the trouble they are creating.
paden cash, post: 379579, member: 20 wrote: Long story short, stay the hell away from assessor's descriptions that wind up on conveyance documents.
A Harris, post: 379583, member: 81 wrote: The lazy attorney that does not include a proper description in the tax sales deeds should be liable for all the trouble they are creating.
So; should I request that the attorney provide a proper description before I make a boundary decision?
RADAR, post: 379586, member: 413 wrote: So; should I request that the attorney provide a proper description before I make a boundary decision?
yes, preferably in writing.
Doug I don't like this any more than the next guy. It surely was a probate attorney and not a real estate type which makes the gaff all the more distasteful. I would ask to see what is insured if anything? Or ask the client to provide a current title certificate; the cost of which may not be so much. Obviously you will check the adjacent deeds to verify that things are copasetic.
In our state we have to seal and sign any description or map that we create. Its a shame that lawyers don't have to do the same.
You survey everything that might be construed be a part of the Tax Map Lot "N", If the deceased had title to it and did not otherwise convey it. Then you submit it to the title company. It may be a rather extensive and expensive survey. The surveyor is liable for his survey work, not title to land.
I did one last year that had to corrected by deeds from an estate and the previous estate. My fee was quite reasonable, as to the lawyers fee? It involved three parcels, one described by deed, two remainders of conveyances and a Filed Map Subdivision. Thankfully the Tax Map looked like the Filed Map. The Filed Map failed to reference the remainder parcels and the last two conveyances used the first parcel description and no mention of the Filed Map. I have yet to be involved when the executor is since deceased.
After a very detailed metes and bounds I included the following;
"BEING all of Lot Number 1 as shown on Filed Map NN, Page NN, also being the following described tracts;
1/ all of a 100' by 120' parcel as described in Deed Book XX, page XX,
2/ the northerly 140' of a 50' by 400' parcel, said 50' by 400' parcel described in Deed Book YY, page YY and
3/ the northerly 140' of the westerly 55' feet of a 115' by 400' parcel, said 115' by 400' parcel described in Deed Book ZZ, page ZZ.
"Filed Map NN, Page NN, Minor Subdivision of Tax Lot 1234, lands of ABC, was for the purpose of subdividing the southerly parts of parent parcels of tracts 2 & 3 above for merger into Tax Lot DEF and states the remainder to be an 0.6129 acre lot, and that ÛÏno further subdivision of land of ABC is intendedÛ."
The first estate conveyed the proper description to the second estate by deed. A second deed then conveyed it from the second estate to the current owner.
Paul in PA
