Deed Conflict -

I would be seriously be looking @ the creek as being the actual boundary, especially if the adjoiner deed calls for it. I think the more research you can do the better. Knowing which parcel was created first is definitely a good think to have under your belt.

I don't know what to say about losing money. Maybe it was underbid and you need to eat the extra work involved.

1. Research back to the conveyance where the line in question was originally created.
2. Lose money. It's much cheaper than losing your reputation.
3. Add a clause to your contracts going forward that if you discover discrepancies or conditions that will greatly increase the amount of work required to complete the job in a profession manner that you will stop work and discuss the situation and options with the client before moving forward.

Showing the deeds in conflict and being done with it is the worst possible option. All you've done is charge the client to create a problem.

if there is indeed a conflict, always go back to the point where the conflict goes away.

i have a mental list of the most interesting and fulfilling surveys i've done over the past 20 years (a couple handfuls). i seriously doubt i made dollar one on any of them individually, or the sum total of them all. the boring work is what pays the bills.

I would consult with your client and let them know what you have found. Let them know that you need extra $ to research their parcel back to its creation to resolve the problem. If they agree, great. If they don't agree, tell them you are going to do it anyway because you are a professional. Help elevate the profession - word may get around.

You say the adjoiners deed calls for the creek and the M&B calls are off 5-25 feet with yours.

You also said your M&B generally follow the creek.

Do your adjoiners calls more accurately describe the center of creek?

If so, and being a newer created parcel it makes sense. Very well could be your deed originated way back with worse measurements and at one time the people writing a newer deed (probably an attorney who only cares for numbers) left off the call for the creek.

Either way it would be hard to argue that your deed wasn't supposed to follow the creek if it generally does follow it's twists and turns.

I would definitely look back and look at older deeds to see if the creek is in it. If so, there's your answer.

Tom Adams, post: 413325, member: 7285 wrote: I would be seriously be looking @ the creek as being the actual boundary, especially if the adjoiner deed calls for it. I think the more research you can do the better. Knowing which parcel was created first is definitely a good think to have under your belt.

I don't know what to say about losing money. Maybe it was underbid and you need to eat the extra work involved.

thing (not think)

Testing....can you do a strikethrough?

RPLS#, post: 413323, member: 12280 wrote: I'll admit, I'm a young surveyor and I have not ran into many deed conflicts that presented much of an issue to my clients. However I have one now thats making me a little nervous. Im surveying a rouhgly 35 acre tract that has one of its boundaries near/in a creek. Its described by metes and bounds that generaly follow the creek but the deed does not mention the creek. The most recent sale of this property was in the '80s but this description has been perpetuated since at least as far back as 1960, I have not researched it farther back. The adjoiner metes and bounds call "along the creek" but its call overlap my subject tract by an inconsistent 5-25 feet. The adjoner description was written in the 80's and the most recent sale was only a few years ago. I haven't looked to see how the land was described before the 80's sale. How do you handle situations like this? I'm think in any case, the clients should be informed of the situation, but would you trace the title back as far as necessary and make a boundary decision based on Junior Senior rights? Or just show the current deeds in conflict and be done with it, unless paid more for additional research. At this point if I continue research I would lose money on the project unless more funds become available. Thoughts?

My thought about your last statement is two fold. One, if you let money dictate your decision, you're making a bad one. Two, if you didn't know the problems before you started, i.e. chase the records before you went to the ground, then you can learn from this.

You will keep your license if you lose money on this job and do it right. You MAY keep your license if you short change it and don't research it, but you may not either. What are your thoughts about that? How will you feed your family? In other words, do the project right, regardless. Sometimes you eat the bear, and sometimes the bear eats you.

Also, case the 1960 deed back UNTIL you find where someone was meandering the creek and some goofball in an attorney's office redacted that particular word 70 years ago and it kept getting copied that way. Once you do that, then evaluate your dignity of calls and the call for a natural object is the highest, then, since they call for the same natural boundary, you'll realize you don't have a deed overlap or gap. Then, you can sleep.

Go hunt the deed!

Tom Adams, post: 413325, member: 7285 wrote: I would be seriously be looking @ the creek as being the actual boundary, especially if the adjoiner deed calls for it. I think the more research you can do the better. Knowing which parcel was created first is definitely a good think thing to have under your belt.

I don't know what to say about losing money. Maybe it was underbid and you need to eat the extra work involved.

alright alright, doing more research.

The Texas Administrative Code (Chapter 663, Subchapter B, Rule å¤663.16) has the answer to your question if you're a Texas registrant:

"(B) A land surveyor assuming the responsibility of performing a land survey also assumes the responsibility for such research of adequate thoroughness to support the determination of the location of the boundaries of the land being surveyed. The land surveyor may rely on record data related to the determination of boundaries furnished for the registrants' use by a qualified provider, provided the registrant reasonably believes such data to be sufficient and notes, references, or credits the documentation by which it is furnished."

http://texreg.sos.state.tx.us/public/readtac$ext.TacPage?sl=R&app=9&p_dir=&p_rloc=&p_tloc=&p_ploc=&pg=1&p_tac=&ti=22&pt=29&ch=663&rl=16

So the options are either (a) perform adequate research or (b) mail your license back to the licensing board.

The real question is "How do I keep from taking on a survey for a fixed fee that doesn't cover the actual level of effort?" The obvious answer is "Don't try to survey for fixed fees." An alternate answer, as far as research is concerned, is you make the research a separate, preliminary item of work and bill it separately up front.

RPLS#, post: 413344, member: 12280 wrote: alright alright, doing more research.

I read a book once that followed the design and construction of a golf course. There was a quote along the lines of "golf course design is 10% skill and 90% drainage, and if you don't have that much skill, add more drainage". It's the same way with boundary surveying and research.

One more thing worth mentioning about researching the public records in Texas is that the private providers such as courthousedirect.com and texasfile.com have a growing fraction of the public records of many Texas counties accessible (for a very reasonable fee) on line. This means that in many counties research gets easier and easier all the time.

Kent McMillan, post: 413354, member: 3 wrote: One more thing worth mentioning about researching the public records in Texas is that the private providers such as courthousedirect.com and texasfile.com have a growing fraction of the public records of many Texas counties accessible (for a very reasonable fee) on line. This means that in many counties research gets easier and easier all the time.

exactly- and the rate at which county clerks are putting their records on line (or expanding their on-line volume) is pretty staggering. i've been to enough county clerks' offices around to understand that most of them have sufficient time to scan all this stuff- looks like county budgets are finally making room for some scanners...

Kent McMillan, post: 413354, member: 3 wrote: One more thing worth mentioning about researching the public records in Texas is that the private providers such as courthousedirect.com and texasfile.com have a growing fraction of the public records of many Texas counties accessible (for a very reasonable fee) on line. This means that in many counties research gets easier and easier all the time.

We use those and countyrecords.com. I have been surveying over 6 years now and have yet to step into a courthouse to do any deed research. In fact, I went into our county clerk's office for the first time a few weeks ago to register a cattle brand and I had to darn near strip to my underwear to get in through the metal detectors...ridiculous.

To the OP: I would be willing to bet the CL of the creek is the true boundary. If the adjoiner calls for the creek then I think the adjoiner call would control in this case.

flyin solo, post: 413356, member: 8089 wrote: exactly- and the rate at which county clerks are putting their records on line (or expanding their on-line volume) is pretty staggering. i've been to enough county clerks' offices around to understand that most of them have sufficient time to scan all this stuff- looks like county budgets are finally making room for some scanners...

We have several Counties here who paid a third party to scan their records and make them accessible online. They used a scanning resolution so low that the documents are unreadable. I consider this fraud, but the County Recorder's involved don't seem to care. They are still charging $1/page for legible copies.

Jim in AZ, post: 413364, member: 249 wrote: We have several Counties here who paid a third party to scan their records and make them accessible online. They used a scanning resolution so low that the documents are unreadable.

Yes, the digital era does take some thought to make it work. I've seen subdivision plats that got scanned at such low resolution that the result was the nearest thing to completely worthless.

You're young, any money saved now will be spent shortly, Crush this and you will have experience/stories/lessons for years.
I never hear about surveyors that went broke because they we're too diligent

From Mr. Black (Fifth Edition),
"Along. Lengthwise of, implying motion or at or near, distinguished from across. By, on, up to, or over, according to the subject-matter and context. The term does not necessarily mean touching at all points, nor does it necessarily imply contact."

You've got to dig in the record, as others have stated. From above, "distinguished from across" is a noteworthy piece. I like the idea of investigating the 5-25 feet as measurements of their time (80's vintage, if I read correctly). Have you tied to the adjoiner's upland monuments? Does that shed light on the accuracy of the distance calls in the adjoiner's record that could be extrapolated to those calls along the creek?

This is some of the good stuff. Get all up in it.

Nobody ever said an education came cheap and the same goes for one's reputation. These are the kind of surveys I relish because bringing the truth to light is so much more rewarding than just a paycheck.