A landowner owns two parcels that together are a PLSS 40. He sells one of the parcels to a new buyer that wants to do a 2 lot subdivision. To make the boundary follow a more natural course the parties do a Boundary Line Agreement which when read is actually a boundary line adjustment (cross quit claims to move the line) but the document also has the uncertainty text. This was in 2003. The document says the line was surveyed by a registered land surveyor and described by said survey.....(no record of survey filed but a subdivision plat is later recorded).
The new parcels do not close because a South 89 21 14 East should be South 81 21 14 East a distance of 148.19 feet. Within a year the subdivision is recorded and on the plat the line is correctly shown as South 81.... In 2006 the landowner sells the other parcel to his grandson and this description also has the error in it. The grandson borrows money but defaults 5 years later and the the parcel goes to the bank. Six months later the banks auctions the property to a cash buyer with the same description including the error. Now I'm working with a party that wants to purchase the property and I figure out the error (makes you wonder about what three previous title searches did). So I need to clean up this mess which seems simple enough to me, I'll file a surveyor's affidavit explaining the error, we will go forward with a corrected description and no one will care. I realize the affidavit does not officially correct the error but is only notice in the record.
So while doing my research I discuss this with the county recorder. He says the original boundary line agreement is invalid because it does not close and I should just ignore it. At the time of recording the recorder noted on the document that it didn't close. Well that just makes this a huge mess. I suppose I could get the new seller and original subdivider to do the boundary line agreement over but the seller at this point has not even been deeded the original parcel that existed before the boundary line agreement. We are three different owners down the road at this point (grandson, bank & new seller).
Its pretty obvious what the original intent was and what they DID. I've recovered the survey markers on the ground (which are not called out in the BLA description) but follow the later subdivision plat. Yeah, and the plat has a legend showing makers set, there is just not any symbols on the plat boundary line. But the markers are there in the ground.
So how would you fix this? Is my simple affidavit OK or do I need to dig up every dead body I can think of and properly rebury it? I wasn't going to do a survey on this as I was just looking things over for a friend (the purchaser). If we got to go complicated I'll have to do survey and even then it's just my documented opinion of the boundary location. Does all this really need to be done to change a mistake of a 9 that's supposed to be a 1?
> A landowner owns two parcels that together are a PLSS 40. He sells one of the parcels to a new buyer that wants to do a 2 lot subdivision. To make the boundary follow a more natural course the parties do a Boundary Line Agreement which when read is actually a boundary line adjustment (cross quit claims to move the line) but the document also has the uncertainty text. This was in 2003.
>Is my simple affidavit OK or do I need to dig up every dead body I can think of and properly rebury it?
So what sort of an affidavit can you give other than that you *believe* that a particular bearing was apparently intended? The professional surveyor who actually made the survey referenced in the agreement can give an affidavit that would be useful in that he or she can state the actual facts about the survey that would clear up the discrepancy, i.e. "I made a survey for Old So-and-So.", "I prepared descriptions of two tracts owned by So-and-So and Such-and-Such.", "The descriptions based upon my survey read ...". That sort of thing.
Kent, you are right and I was just thinking about that. The surveyor referenced in the BLA is not called out by name but I know who later did the subdivision plat. His affidavit would probably carry some weight while anything I did would just be explaining what I had discovered. I just hope I can get the affidavit and the "system" will accept it. It's obvious the title companies don't care, apparently they don't even bother to run Express Map anymore.
I'd agree that the best thing to do would be to get the affidavit prepared and signed by the surveyor who wrote the description. Their affidavit would carry more weight as it is from the original author. Second best is to file the affidavit yourself as a "surveyor's affidavit."
It is, after all, simply a scrivener's error.
JBS
"So while doing my research I discuss this with the county recorder. He says the original boundary line agreement is invalid because it does not close and I should just ignore it."
Is the County Recorder a Land Surveyor? An Attorney?
Neither a Land Surveyor or Attorney. In this county the political position of surveyor is combined with the recorder.
The reason I talked with him was I was looking to find out what sort of documents have been recorded to fix these kinds of issues, which is something I'd expect the recorder to know. I don't agree that the conveyance is invalid and should be ignored. If we applied the perfect math in the description for it to be valid concept then there is a lot of recorded stuff that would be rejected.
The thing that amuses me is the acceptance of perfect math descriptions when in fact they don't really describe the reality on the ground. It's easy to sit around in an office and check the math on paper, line all your ducks up precisely and all that. It's an entirely different thing out on the physical landscape. I've always thought the math had to yield to the physical but much of the rest of the world has different ideas.
If he's not a Land Surveyor or an Attorney I would nod and smile and ignore his remarks.
"I've always thought the math had to yield to the physical but much of the rest of the world has different ideas."
You are correct, and it's WAY past time we begin to educate them and the "expert measurers" who are fooling the public into thinking they are Land Surveyors!
Doing a Survey -What would you do?
If you were doing a survey and discovered what I have, how would you handle it?
Would anyone move the boundary from where the sub plat shows it on the ground?
Would anyone determine the BLA conveyance void?
Would anyone get new quit-claim deeds via a new BLA?
Would anyone just write a new description based upon their boundary opinion?
How many just wouldn't be able to figure out where the problem is?
Wow in California the County Recorder has no authority to declare a recorded document invalid for any reason let alone an obvious typo.
He doesn't have the authority, just issued his opinion. They had marked the deed with a NC which means non closure. They may have sent out a letter to the owner. I got a letter once saying a conveyance was not valid because it called to the south side of a county road ROW. The call wasn't definite enough as the ROW is not defined by meets and bounds in the record. In actuality the boundary by law probably goes to the center of the road (which you can find, maybe not precisely to 0.01 feet). So I wouldn't consider the conveyance invalid. I just ignored it. A court would consider everything in the light of the deed being valid and wouldn't reject it cause they couldn't find the road. You could show the judge where the road is, wouldn't even need to get out of the car.
