I opened a Hornets Nest

Aside from the cabin being over the platted line how does other occupation lines match with your survey?

But to answer your question on if I would go back out and set pins...........I might but I would try to avoid it. I hate it when I step into a hornets nest and generally try to get away.

Aside from the cabin being over the platted line how does other occupation lines match with your survey?

None, zero, zilch, nada...

The last time anyone did any maintenance at all was probably 3 decades ago, if then.

"At this point my client wants to either have the sellers resolve the issue with the neighbor or finish his contract with me and record the survey.Would you go back and finish the survey?"

Nope, not unless you enjoy a pain in the ass client.?ÿ

If you have the evidence that the cabin is over the line, and your client wants to buy the Lot, then yes I would set then corners. Have you looked and found any deeds where they sold a portion the Lot to to the Lot with the Cabin? I am sure if one existed then Cabin owner would have brought it to your attention. Do you have any corners going the other way from your Lot, the opposite direction of the Lot you found Surveyed?

This situation is not unique and for me usually appears on lake front cabins for some reason.
If you set corners and your client backs out of the deal you have to file a record of survey and doing so may cause harm to the owner and may be opening yourself up to his litigation when you are not bound to either party. Of course you know this already.
Are you convinced that the monuments are found are original to the plat? You didn't mention if the other cabin is over a line, they must be fairly close together. Are the structures the same age? Ask the title company to provide a chain of title to 1941 to see if the two lots had the same owner at one point.
How did the neighbor find out about the situation (cabin being over the line) if you haven't set any stakes yet? If it was because your field crew spoke too soon, than you first need to have a discussion with them about being tactful.
I was surveying this week near Bridle Trails SP and a neighbor leaned out of his Range Rover and asked what I was doing. I blurted "light rail" and turned to continue about my business. OMG, not tactful.

More tactful than my former boss when he was a party chief,told a lady at the cemetery he was laying out for a new interstate off-ramp. Or the time we were performing a topographic survey on a residential lot and he told a priest that we were preparing an exhibit for a brothel license. At least the priest got a chuckle out of that one.

cor?úrob?úo?úrate
[k???r??b???rŽt]

VERB
confirm or give support to (a statement, theory, or finding):
"the witness had corroborated the boy's account of the attack"
synonyms: confirm ?ú verify ?ú endorse ?ú ratify ?ú authenticate ?ú validate ?ú certify ?ú support ?ú back up ?ú uphold ?ú bear out ?ú bear witness to ?ú attest to ?ú testify to ?ú vouch for ?ú give credence to ?ú [more]

Washington State law says that you are required to file when your survey reveals some discrepancy in the record (RCW58.09.090(d)), and a discrepancy is defined as, amongst other things, missing monuments & encroachments. We all dance around that requirement to file by calling our surveys to be of a "preliminary nature" until we set monuments. But it isn't strictly the setting monuments that triggers the ROS filing requirement in WA.

In this case you may well have stirred up the lawyers. I think you better make sure your rear end is covered by filing that survey. Your data is discoverable anyway.

Laws vary among States. At this stage of the game I would prepare an exhibit showing the property lines as you determined them and all evidence of occupation.
The owner has two options. 1. Negotiate a Boundary Line Agreement with all affected neighbors. (Money for you)
2. The Owner or Buyer if he decides to buy into the mess can hire an Attorney and file suit (Lots of Money for the Attorney)
In option 2 a couple of Attorneys decide where the property lines should go. Option 1 the Landowners decide where the property lines go.
Option 1 costs less than $10,000
Option 2 costs over $100,000 for each side.
The problem with old lakeside lots is they never surveyed the shoreline and side lines. My theory is that they just drug a tape down the access road and set wooden stakes at the corner positions along the road. The sidelines we're never staked and the shoreline was never accurately determined.My experience with the legal system is that the Judge will go with the best evidence of occupation. If the cabin is old the Judge will use that to determine the property lines. The Judge will probably take two years or more to review evidence, schedule a trial, and make a decision.
I would advise your client to back out of the deal until the Seller can straighten things out with the neighbors. Would you want to vacation on the lake with friendly neighbors or enemies?
I've run into several of these cases in the last 5 years. Nowdays everyone wants to know exactly where their property lines are. Back when school teachers were the only ones who didn't have to work all summer people just kind of staked their claim to the area the developer told them was theirs.
At this stage all you can do is display the evidence as you see it. Hopefully both sides will accept your survey and agree to a solution. Unfortunately there are Surveyors out there that will give his client what they want.
You need to explore the chain of title for the properties. Who owned the properties before they transferred can have big effect on property lines.
Unless I had a excellent Plat, good original monuments to go by I wouldn't be setting any corner pins.

In Montana you don't have to file every survey you do. It's not a Certificate of Survey if you title your drawing as an Exhibit. Your Exhibit is discoverable. Most of my opposing Surveyors don't even seal their exhibits. I'm not sure, but I believe a filed Certificate of Survey is not required to be included in discovery since its a public record. Your Exhibit is required to be included in discovery. If it isn't your Attorney can't use it. If you get to the stage of dealing with Attorneys do what they tell you and nothing more. All answers are Yes, No, and I don't know.

I only finish a survey when I am being paid.

In the event of building location problems, I show how things fall in relation to record boundary and also show usage limits.

It has always been my understanding that the seller must provide proof of title and to clear all problems.

That includes problems that are found soon after transfers because they guarantee title by way of a Warranty Deed.

The seller is also who has usually acquired rights from long term ownership and use and maintence of the land.

I slept on this and concluded that yes I probably would set the corner points but I would want to meet with the owner of the cabin first and see if there is something to explain the encroachment. I would also insist on being paid or put a lien on the property.

I have had my absolute fill of belligerent adjoiners though so my tolerance for abuse from any party is pretty small.

I've had these kind of surveys before. Not fun. I've noticed surveyors take these surveys as our problem to solve. We take the burden as our own. That puts us in the line of fire, and puts the burden of proof on us. As I've gotten older, I started looking at these surveys as, I didn't cause this to happen, I didn't brake it. We should become messengers in these cases. Many time if not most of the time the owner and or buyer don't want to hear the truth. But it's up to the owner to fix his problem. Not yours. Then without a grand stand of marching bands and announcer, walk away. The liability is way to high to insert your decision. Show the owner the facts, if he will listen. But remember he didn't hire you to screw up his?ÿ property. There you go! Back in the line of fire. If it were me, I'd quietly walk away never to think about this ever again.

Jules it seems like you are contradictory in your explanation. Present the facts but don't present the facts if they might expose a problem. We didn't cause the problem so it seems like you are trying to have it both ways.