I'm not licensed. I read lots. Any professional group like lawyers, doctors, surveyors, engineers etc that avoid invoking sanctions for the sake of possibly being ostracized or retaliated against is cheating the public from the process that's supposed to be protecting them.
I only said let the job be done by the board, unless every single member of the license surveyors the state are a board member, this isnt their business of meteing out punishments or direction or anything because it's not their job.
the board has the responsibility for the process
if the members don't have time they should resign their board ship
and yes it is that simple otherwise we don't deserve to exist
Going to throw out a hypothetical situation here…
You find 3 of 4 Survey monuments set by the original surveyor perfect per their plat. You then find the 4th monument 2 ft off their platted dimensions. An established fence matches the “erroneous” monument. At what point is enough evidence to determine the monument has been disturbed? Do the 3 other monuments set by the original surveyor have any credence as evidence to the 4th being disturbed? How about a cap being waffled (typical of fence builder resetting our monuments). Or maybe the monument is up a foot while all the others are flush? Does the person who moved the monument need to confess to you before acceptance of it being disturbed? You might say none of that matters if the monument has been relied upon over a certain amount of years. If it’s the latter, then what’s deterring a homeowner from moving the monument the moment we leave?
Back in the Olden Days around here all the local surveyors got along really well. OK most. It seemed like everyone had worked for or with another at some point. There was never any mention of going to the board. The two surveyors that disagreed would get together with their information and discuss the issue. Most times one had evidence that the other didn't find and would share it. Surveys would be altered to reflect what both guys agreed on. Then maybe a beer or two when done.
I somehow don't see that happening much anymore. Too much distance between surveyors, too much I'm a better measurer than you with my flawless GPS even though I have no clue how it was done before electronics. The shame of it is that the public suffers and there is more and more crap filed every week. I liked things better when we all could get along and admit it if we were wrong every now and again. It didn't hurt that much at all and you got another chance to learn something.
All we can do is present the evidence as we found it, where we found it, when we found it.
Some one else has to determine the judgement...
All we can do is present the evidence as we found it, where we found it, when we found it.
Some one else has to determine the judgement...
I agree to a certain extent, but if that is the case do we not reject monuments unless there are multiple at the same location, only by accepting one over the other?
There is a dream called perfection. That dream does not fit the real world of land surveying. It would be nice if it did. There would also be far less of us involved in the profession if it was really that simple.
I'm not sure when we started arguing about the boundary resolution. The issue is not that two surveyors' opinions differ, it's that no one has any idea why they differ, due to someone withholding information.
The OP, and initial discussion, was how to handle one licensee refusing to share critical information with another licensee - information that led the first surveyor to reject a monument in place and set another that is apparently at odds with an established, monumented boundary (and apparently occupation as well).
If it's not spelled out in the statutes, at the very least I would want to see a Board opinion on the statement that "licensees are under no obligation to share critical information with other licensees regarding conflicting boundary resolutions".
If that statement is true in his state, I may not like it, but there it is in black & white. Client will probably need to discuss options with the neighbor and perhaps get an attorney involved. And at least I have done my part and followed through as much as I can (even if I do not like the result).
If that statement is not true, then I would be sending the Board opinion to the other surveyor with a second request to kindly fulfill his or her professional duties and show me how they arrived at their conclusions.
But I'm not asking the Board to rule on a boundary solution, or force my solution on anyone else, or even saying that the other surveyor is a terrible professional and deserves sanction.
If the other surveyor has additional evidence, I'd like to look at it as well, because it's entirely possible that I might be the one needing to re-evaluate the line or monument in question.
By the tone of the OP I was under the impression he was voicing his concern about the rejection of the monument. The response was inappropriate by the new Surveyor, but I didn’t see where it mentioned that he withheld evidence. That’s at least how I read it.
We reject monuments all the time; if we find evidence to support that. That doesn't mean someone else can't pass judgement on our determination.
@holy-cow The duty of the Board is to protect the public. One way they do it is enforcing the laws, rules, and standard of care. When a licensee practices outside the norm to the point of harms, a board absolutely must put an end to it. That may or may not include violation of an objective law or rule.
I asked the OP if he had surveyed the property for his “old client”. He hasn’t answered that question.
I can’t believe that anyone would report another surveyor to the board without doing a survey. That is akin to an MD accusing another MD of malpractice without examining the patient.
Rant over and I hope everyone had a great day. Spring has finally arrived in Alaska.
I advised my client to notify his neighbor to the north that his Surveyor had created a 2.2 foot jog at the fence corner and he would have to construct his new fence to his Surveyor's pin and not to my client's fence corner to avoid trespassing on the neighbor to the west.
I don't understand why this advise is given. No one is obligated to accept the results of any retracement survey. It's a certified opinion, not a court order. We've all seen survey pins that were never used. I once found a survey that marked the center of section using the sign of the cross 40 feet from old fences. 30 years later the owners involved still used the old fences. Everyone is happy. I certainly didn't tell them they had to use it.
@fairbanksls I have to disagree. After nearly five years of investigations and pro review, I can tell you with certainty a survey is rarely required. Violations causing harm are generally glaring, many to the point they shock the viewer. I used to be allowed site visits where I could gather evidence but I never surveyed a property in support of a prosecution. It simply isn't necessary.
That being said there are a few things to remember. The vast majority of violations I discovered were handled with a phone call or office visit. Approaching fellow professionals with respect had an impact and solved most problems. On rare occasions a frequent flyer would file something that had to be fixed. Even those cases started with a meeting to encourage corrective action. Those who dug their heels in went to hearing. Every single one of those lost, and many are now off the streets. Again, I did not re-survey once.
That being said there are a few things to remember. The vast majority of violations I discovered were handled with a phone call or office visit. Approaching fellow professionals with respect had an impact and solved most problems.
Have to agree with this 100%.
I don't see getting the board involved here,,,,,,,,,yet.
This can almost always be solved how you're presenting it once the emotions are turned down. That should be accomplished between the two surveyors. This is a learning experience for the newby....... I'm guessing.
Protect the client; part of that is figuring out how to keep attorneys out of the process.
Why wouldn't the land owner pull out the erroneous pin?
While, as a surveyor doing such a thing seems extreme, if I was the landowner, I would certainly do so. He is defending his land by removing what he sees as erroneous information. Could he get sued over it? Sure. But without proof he removed it, what could happen?
I have dealt with conflicts where the one side or the other removes pins they do not agree with. Even with lawyers involved, nothing ever comes of it (criminal or civil), unless a judge specifically says to not remove a certain corner.
Regarding the board...
As long as there isn't fraud, lack of care, or absolute refusal to answer the phone, I am not sure what a board should do. Being an ass isnt really against any rules.
That said, if the surveyor was in error, I mean really in error, it seems that he would be open to liability regarding every landowner affected by his survey. That alone makes me answer every phone call and take every single one of them seriously.
IMHO.... Creating discord where peace & harmony once existed, by putting a pin OVER a fenced line of occupation, ignoring an existing monument, and refusing to discuss the differences of opinion as to location and the facts that each surveyor relied upon in order to form their different opinions, is deficient in the standard of care one expects when hiring a Professional Surveyor.
Without knowing the individuals involved, or hearing both sides of the discussion, I have to assign blame to those of us that mentor the younger generation of surveyors and recommend them for licensure. We, as a community of professionals, need to teach the up & comers this aspect of the profession while we teach the legal principals, how to weigh the evidence, right along with everything else we drum into their brains, before we sign off on a recommendation for licensure.
Communication, as hard as it may be to get started, is the solution, and will probably lead to mutual respect in the end.
Rant over.....
@holy-cow in my opinion diging only 2' for corner evidence is well within the normal standard of care. I would have proportioned hundreds of more corners than I have if I didn't dig 2'.
@dougie if that's all we do we are not meeting munuum standards in many states.
For example:
The NSPS model standards adopted by reference in Alaska says we must "Compare and analyze all of the data gathered and reach a proffesional opinion as to the most probable location of the corners of the property".
Massachusetts surveors are required to "Make interpretations of the record and physical evidence and draw conclusions based on the laws of evidence".
Texas Manual of Practice (I know not quite the same): "The boundary lines and corners of the subject property shall be determined in accordance with current case law, statutes, and Texas Board of Proffesional Engineers and Land Surveyors"
Clients want boundary surveys to tell them where the boundary is, not a list of evidence.
I have to assign blame to those of us that mentor the younger generation of surveyors and recommend them for licensure.
Perhaps the person(s) that recommend them for licensure should have their name listed with the registrant?
"Hey, Jim, what were you thinking recommending that guy?"