The title report I'm working with has the "deed" for street purposes as an exception in the legal description: Except that portion conveyed to the city of X for street purposes under recording number 1234. However,?ÿ when I look at the recorded document it says Deed for street purposes in large bold letters on the top but further down it states that the grantor conveys and warrants, for street purposes, a street and utilities easement.?ÿ
?ÿ
So at first I thought that since it's an exception to the legal description that I would take the area out of the property but now I'm thinking that even with the exception that the ownership of the property was not conveyed by the deed, rather it's an easement and I should leave it in and show it as an easement.?ÿ I emailed the title officer about getting the exception removed from the legal description but haven't heard back yet
?ÿ
I don't know how they could have made it any more confusing?ÿ
I just love those sort of documents.?ÿ Have seen the same thing too many times.?ÿ What confuses people anymore is that an appraiser will decide what the change in value of the property will be once the document is recorded.?ÿ They assume this means they are truly selling the tract when what is really happening is just an easement that is worth as much as the land value to the recipient.
The best way to handle that is to show the original lot line and note the "Deed for street purposes" with the filing document referenced.?ÿ It is an exception to your deed so you have to show it.?ÿ Show the facts and let the others fight out what it means legally.?ÿ Just my own opinion for what it's worth.
?ÿ
Where it gets really fun is the situation where the initial R-O-W line was at, say, 25 feet from the section line. The so-called deed/easement is for an additional five feet for a total of 30 feet.?ÿ The first 25 is clearly an easement.?ÿ Anyone assuming the "deed" is truly a taking in fee simple for an isolated strip is a ***********.
The best way to handle that is to show the original lot line and note the "Deed for street purposes" with the filing document referenced.?ÿ It is an exception to your deed so you have to show it.?ÿ Show the facts and let the others fight out what it means legally.?ÿ Just my own opinion for what it's worth.
?ÿ
People hire us to clear up these?ÿ these kind of problems, not punt.?ÿ
***********
I know that word!!!!!
People hire us to clear up these?ÿ these kind of problems, not punt.?ÿ
You got to know when to fold ??em.
@aliquot I disagree, they hire lawyers to clear those things up. All we have is professional opinion and we can state that opinion in court, but it is ultimately up to the attorneys to argue what is what when it comes to a crap deed. I'm not going to put my neck on the line for some poorly written description. I would show the questionable portion on the plat with a note stating that the portion is unclear. Just my 2 cents
The only person that's going to clear it up is a Judge. ???? ?ÿ
People hire us to help clear up these?ÿ these kind of problems, not punt.?ÿ
I would go as far as saying; a surveyor can advise them on the best way to clear this up. A surveyor is not a knight in shining armor; riding in on his white horse to save the day. We are there to find the facts; helping the owner(s) sort through these facts should also be a big part of what we do.
?ÿ
So I agree; punting should not be an option. Well, unless they don't want our help...
And we shouldn't hide these facts. If the judge asks you, why you failed to show it on your survey, and you answer: Well, the client didn't want me to, because it would be bad for him. What do you think will be the response from the judge?
?ÿ
Dougie
I'd reference the road deed and show the area outside the limits of the road and the area within the limits of the road.?ÿ Let the lawyers deal with the interest conveyed.
The Professional Surveyor should never leave title companies, lawyers, or the courts to determine rights on thier own.
Title companies dtermine what they are willing to insure, not ownership.
Attorneys advise on rights, not ownership
Courts decide the matters in front of them. It is our job to walk them to the correct decision. We have numerous opportunities to assist the owners before it comes to that. If we slap the math on the ground, refer to attorneys, and leave the courts with no fact pattern to follow we are complicit in harming the public.
My .02, Tom
There are usually state Statutes that define streets and street dedications. I would start there, they shouldn't be hard to find. They may contain the answer to define the land granted under Street purposes in this context.?ÿ
@aliquot we are not Attorneys, all we can do is present the recorded information and what is found on the ground, the rest is a matter of title and who owns what.?ÿ In cases like this, it's a legal issue.
Why is this even considered a problem? It happens often that fee ownership has a ROW easement over a portion of it. Why does anything need to be "cleaned up"? Is it just the fact that the easement was granted by a deed document instead of an easement agreement?
So it sounds like the Title company doesn't want to insure the portion that was conveyed as an easement. Is the person purchasing the title insurance okay with that? He could certainly try to get the title company to insure that portion but so what if they don't? I just don't see a problem here.
@husker796?ÿ I don't get it, showing it is not sticking your neck out. Survey it how your titlework indicates, but show enough so when the attorneys say no fee simple was transferred, your survey has enough. Unless you are wanting to prepare another survey and get paid more. And 90% of my clients hire me just TO stick my neck out, otherwise they would use a cheaper, faster surveyor. My 2 cents.
@chris-bouffard?ÿ ?ÿBut the recorded information says it's an easement, why present it otherwise? I understand your reluctance, but I suspect your clients think you are surveying what they own; or at the least finding the problem and preparing a survey that will allow other professional to fix their part. If I handed off theses types of problems, my clients would hand off their work to another surveyor.
@lurker?ÿ ?ÿ That is what happens most of the time I see this. Often the owner five deeds back did not covey the right-of-way to the the next owner, by lessing it out or by rewritting the deed. The right-of-way is still just an easement, but technically owned by a guy that has been dead for forty years. You CAN show the situation, please the title company, protect the owner AND cover your butt, all on the same survey.
?ÿ
Therein lies the problem. Useless strips and gores pass without an express reservation. Unfortunately surveyors are often told to prepare a description that does just that. Rather than make the case and refuse they take the Wal-Mart approach "the customer is always right". I'm calling horsecrap. Does your surgeon go after your appendix from the left because the insurance company says to? Sounds ridiculous, but we do similar stupid tricks ALL THE TIME.
Take the professional role and steer clients away from harm. At the very least stop participating in trashing rights in real property.?ÿ
