Discovered an error made by an otherwise very good surveyor today. The mistake was made in 1997. The buyer of the freshly-surveyed tract in 1997 constructed a commercial building worth in excess of $1 million on said tract shortly after purchase. In fact, the buyer had deeded the property to the City and leased back the building under one of those stupid Community Development Block Grants or some similar financing tool that can be used to obtain easy money, but, only if the City owns the land. Recently, the City deeded the land back to the 1997 buyer as the program is now complete.
Now, the owner wants to combine a portion of this metes and bounds tract with some adjacent lots in a block of a subdivision that was platted prior to 1997. That is the only reason I am involved. When I draft the plat showing all information needed to accomplish what the City is willing to consider a lot split I will be obligated to provide a correct description for the metes and bounds tract. I'm betting the title company will go nuts before this is over.
What happened was that the point of beginning of the metes and bounds tract was the northeast corner of Lot 7 in the block of the subdivision mentioned. The description then runs to the east, then south, then west to a corner of a different subdivision, then west along the north side of that subdivision to the east line of the block where the description started, then north along that east block line to the southeast corner of Lot 7, then northeasterly along the east line of Lot 7 to the point of beginning.
The problem is that the 1997 description, which has been used several times, says to go north along the east block line to "the point of beginning", a specific distance and bearing. That specific distance and bearing will get you to the southeast corner of Lot 7, not the northeast corner of Lot 7. The difference is a distance of about 120 feet along a line about four degrees to the right compared to the previous bearing.
Is there ever such a thing as a SIMPLE survey?
I find errors more often than not. The solution is possibly real direct. Did they go south 120 feet too far, or do you go "back to the point of beginning" regardless sof the distance.
But, on the other hand, even if you find the apparent error, did someone else interpret it differently? Has ownership and use set a different point?
Who is responsible for a poorly-worded and inadequate description? It is usually the retracing surveyor, and virtually never the scrivener that wrote the extremely poor language.
No it never ceases....as you imply.
Tom
Lawyer’s errors wind up in prison; doctor’s errors get buried while Land Surveyor’s error’s get filed at the courthouse for the entire world to see.
According to what you say - the controlling language is "along the block line to the point of beginning".
It could be a hundred feet or a thousand feet - doesn't really matter.
You should correct legal for record sake.
> Lawyer’s errors wind up in prison; doctor’s errors get buried while Land Surveyor’s error’s get filed at the courthouse for the entire world to see.
Or lawyer's errors wind up recorded in the courthouse for the surveyor's to try and decopher and fix such as typos in legal descriptions.
Agree SURVEYLTD. Would look at occupation closely.
jud
Mr. Cow (MOOO!!)
You don't have much of a problem. Just provide them a corrected desc, no plat, with a little note, and a bill, and they will all thank you. Tell them what happened, and what you are doing to fix it. IF there are any latent title problems, due to it, well, then a plat and new bill. 😛
You will know that they appreciated it, when their cheque does not bounce!
🙂
N
Sounds like a simple fix, at least for the boundary surveyor. Remember the heirarchy of calls - bearings and distances are really far down the list. Place the error where the error occurred (it sounds like a simple latent ambiquity), prepare the appropriate documents, explain the principles you used to the interested parties, collect fee and happily move on the next FUBAR'd project.
And then there was the engineer who combined information from the highway plans, the GLO notes, and a recorded description, all with different basis of bearings and accuracies, drafted it on an aerial, and called it an ALTA survey. It mis-closed over 300 feet. I kid you not.
> And then there was the engineer who combined information from the highway plans, the GLO notes, and a recorded description, all with different basis of bearings and accuracies, drafted it on an aerial, and called it an ALTA survey. It mis-closed over 300 feet. I kid you not.
What happened to him if anything?
A minor suspension, basically a slap on the wrist. Appalling, eh?
A Wrong POB Does Not Make A Lot Misclose
A lot description either closes or not, despite where the POB is described.
If the lot description begins at the NE Corner of the adjacent lot and ends at the SE corner of same lot, then the description miscloses.
If the lot description begins at the NE Corner of the adjacent lot, passes the SE corner and ends at the NE corner of same lot with no other lines missing, then the description closes.
If the description of how to get to the POB is incorrect it does not in itself affect the closure unless there are multiple missreferences throughout the document.
If the description closes on itself, simply correct the tie description to the POB.
Since you have piqued our interest we definitely want to see this "description".
Paul in PA
I agree. Perfect closure with a mistated distance which has no effect on the closed figure.
Consider yourself fortunate that a call to or along a particular line wasn't dropped along the way, thereby losing a controlling element and creating a real misclosure.
