Dave,
That was an excellent mini - treatise on the subject.
The Deed contains the written agreement between the parties but the parties also may make agreements in parol after the Deed delivery to establish their boundary location.
so you mean to say the deed may contain a description of the boundary but any agreements in parol need not be written in the deed description?
so the deed may contain line 1-2 N33 34E 223.32Ft but since they agreed on a new boundary "in Parol", the line 1-2 on the ground is the nN43-54E 323.32Ft and they need not update this on the deed description?
what kind of a system is that? main purpose of the deed description is to have both ground & deed description to be equal so that future re-tracement would be based on the description.
FrancisH, post: 398545, member: 10211 wrote: so you mean to say the deed may contain a description of the boundary but any agreements in parol need not be written in the deed description?
so the deed may contain line 1-2 N33 34E 223.32Ft but since they agreed on a new boundary "in Parol", the line 1-2 on the ground is the nN43-54E 323.32Ft and they need not update this on the deed description?what kind of a system is that? main purpose of the deed description is to have both ground & deed description to be equal so that future re-tracement would be based on the description.
Yes it would be wise to try to correct a massive mistake like that. But the original deed is recorded and cannot be changed. You can't take the original description out of teh public records and "update" it. The remedy would have to take some kind of new deed or agreement between the adjoiners or a court action if the adjoiners can't resolve it. The surveyor can, however, show the error on his plat and save it in perpetuity depending on the State and the State laws. That "correction" is the surveyor's opinion of the correct location of the already-deeded property and does not, by itself, change the original deed. The Land Surveyor simply does not have that capacity of changing an executed deed between two outside parties.
By your combative nature, I am thinking your question was actually simply a rhetorical question, but I thought I would attempt to answer it as though it was in earnest.
FrancisH, post: 398545, member: 10211 wrote: so you mean to say the deed may contain a description of the boundary but any agreements in parol need not be written in the deed description?
so the deed may contain line 1-2 N33 34E 223.32Ft but since they agreed on a new boundary "in Parol", the line 1-2 on the ground is the nN43-54E 323.32Ft and they need not update this on the deed description?what kind of a system is that? main purpose of the deed description is to have both ground & deed description to be equal so that future re-tracement would be based on the description.
Yes the parties may mutually establish the boundary of the course, 1-2 N33 34E 223.32Ft, without a written agreement. If they know they are changing the course by extending it 100' then they would need to record a corrected Deed reflecting that. But if they aren't aware the made a mutual mistake of 100' then a writing is not required. The authorities are mixed, some say the aggrieved party can get the land back years later in the case of a mutual mistake and others say they can't. The Courts will step back and look at all the evidence together and this informs which of conflicting rules will apply.
I have worked in a place which has a land title registry system -British Columbia. There are certain advantages to that system, as FrancisH argues. The drawbacks are also many.
First, and foremost, it's a big government department with all the fees, costs & bureaucracy that brings with it in search of a problem to solve. Remember that the title problems we speak of affect a tiny minority of all properties.
Second, surveyors still make mistakes sometimes. That doesn't change. And the set monuments still govern over the dimensions when they do, same as here.
Third, there can be no AP or unwritten agreement boundaries. Which sounds good at first. But when you have a longstanding and well marked boundary that has been occupied in good faith by all parties until some smart alec-y surveyor shows up and disrupts things, it may stop seeming so.
So in effect people who have no license to practice surveying can establish boundaries and people who are licensed to survey don't do actual surveying and just walk around a lot and look for corners the client already knows......
Is my scenario correct?
Yeah, that about sums it up.
Warren Smith, post: 398588, member: 9900 wrote: Yeah, that about sums it up.
It's a bitch making this much money and not doing a thing...but I guess somebody has to do it. 😉
I'm glad it's all cleared up now. Whew! that was a long thread.
FrancisH, post: 398587, member: 10211 wrote: So in effect people who have no license to practice surveying can establish boundaries and people who are licensed to survey don't do actual surveying and just walk around a lot and look for corners the client already knows......
Is my scenario correct?
It's like American Jazz Music where soloists operate within a framework set up by the rhythm section. Some bands, like Big Bands, are more strict, others, such as Miles Davis, rely more on improvisation. Sometimes precision is called for, other times more looseness.
Dave Karoly, post: 398657, member: 94 wrote: It's like American Jazz Music where soloists operate within a framework set up by the rhythm section. Some bands, like Big Bands, are more strict, others, such as Miles Davis, rely more on improvisation. Sometimes precision is called for, other times more looseness.
I prefer to conduct my usual day to day R.W work in 4/4 time. But I always save my boundary work for a more refined 3/4 waltz-style time.
paden cash, post: 398660, member: 20 wrote: I prefer to conduct my usual day to day R.W work in 4/4 time. But I always save my boundary work for a more refined 3/4 waltz-style time.
If you incorporate a dip needle into your work then that would be equivalent to a "plumber" (trombone player) blowing a hot solo.
Pretty soon Francis will accuse us of doing all our work in Rag time.
Dave Karoly, post: 398657, member: 94 wrote: Sometimes precision is called for, other times more looseness.
Dave Karoly, post: 398662, member: 94 wrote: Pretty soon Francis will accuse us of doing all our work in Rag time.
Or Mel Brooks; Scat dancing...
[MEDIA=youtube]BLgJWaDYPc8[/MEDIA]
Francis, it can happen. FACT: it's called "Land ownership" If you own something, you can do stuff with it. You are free to cut the bumper off your car, and weld another on it.
You can do stuff that effects, modifies, changes, and moves your lines of title.
Did you know that you can WALK across your neighbor's lot, for enough years, to GAIN the RIGHT to walk there? Actual court case, where an old man walked across a vacant lot, for many yrs.
Actual owner showed up, and hired construction workers. Dug footers, and building foundations. Old man comes along, and hops over the ditches. Construction workers cuss him. He sued, shut down the whole site, until he died.
It's a big world, Mr Francis.
N
[MEDIA=youtube]C0_ZMpEDFO4[/MEDIA]
Smooth as the motions of a Wild Heerbrugg theodolite...
DDSM
Dave Karoly, post: 398662, member: 94 wrote: ..Pretty soon Francis will accuse us of doing all our work in Rag time.
Even though it has a good toe tapping beat, every good surveyor knows rag-time is only for construction staking.
Waltz Time is for Martini's
[MEDIA=youtube]H1tnbPBCtnI[/MEDIA]
Loyal, post: 398693, member: 228 wrote: Waltz Time is for Martini's
[MEDIA=youtube]H1tnbPBCtnI[/MEDIA]
Hammett's original book, The Thin Man, is a masterpiece:
Five days. Nothin' but crickets chirpin'. Hard to believe.
Holy Cow, post: 399215, member: 50 wrote: Five days. Nothin' but crickets chirpin'. Hard to believe.
FrancisH in reality was either Carlos Hathcock or Cam Turgison, or both. Recent political events have apparently drawn his attention to other arenas.
Or he may have fell victim to some bad fugu sushi...
