In a recent Ring, ring posting there was a lot of discussion about recording surveys and states that don't have recording laws. In November of 2013 Shawn BIllings posted a poll looking for info on if your state was PLSS or not and whether or not it was mandatory to record a survey. There seem to be more than a few states without recording laws.
Given that boundary survey records:
- help protect property rights and the fabric of the cadastre;
- increase the likelihood of quiet enjoyment of title;
- reduce the potential for survey error based gaps/overlaps;
- give you and every other surveyor more basis to accept/reject found monumentation;
- protect and perpetuate your survey;
- makes corner cutters think a little longer about which corners to cut since their mistakes/shoddy work will be of record.
I just don't understand how anyone can defend the absence of recording laws.
If your state does NOT have a recording law - Please share:
1. What state you are answering about;
2. Does your state survey society support adding a recording law?
[INDENT]A) If so - have the tried to introduce legislation?
[INDENT]i) If so - what happened with that effort?[/INDENT]
B) If not - what is the rationale behind making boundary info difficult or impossible to obtain?[/INDENT]
If your state DOES have a recording law - Please share:
1. What state you are answering about;
2. Is the survey subject to review?
The goal is to get everyone working from the same set of facts.
I could see the review being onerous. Fortunately, Alaska does NOT require review of any type if the survey being recorded is NOT subdividing land (and no local authority can legally require such a review).I just don't see an upside for the survey community or for the public when surveys occur but aren't publicly available - help me understand.
JKinAK, post: 432942, member: 7219 wrote: In a recent Ring, ring posting there was a lot of discussion about recording surveys and states that don't have recording laws. In November of 2013 Shawn BIllings posted a poll looking for info on if your state was PLSS or not and whether or not it was mandatory to record a survey. There seem to be more than a few states without recording laws.
Given that boundary survey records:
- help protect property rights and the fabric of the cadastre;
- increase the likelihood of quiet enjoyment of title;
- reduce the potential for survey error based gaps/overlaps;
- give you and every other surveyor more basis to accept/reject found monumentation;
- protect and perpetuate your survey;
- makes corner cutters think a little longer about which corners to cut since their mistakes/shoddy work will be of record.I just don't understand how anyone can defend the absence of recording laws.
If your state does NOT have a recording law - Please share:
1. What state you are answering about;
2. Does your state survey society support adding a recording law?
[INDENT]A) If so - have the tried to introduce legislation?
[INDENT]i) If so - what happened with that effort?[/INDENT]
B) If not - what is the rationale behind making boundary info difficult or impossible to obtain?[/INDENT]If your state DOES have a recording law - Please share:
1. What state you are answering about;
2. Is the survey subject to review?The goal is to get everyone working from the same set of facts.
I could see the review being onerous. Fortunately, Alaska does NOT require review of any type if the survey being recorded is NOT subdividing land (and no local authority can legally require such a review).I just don't see an upside for the survey community or for the public when surveys occur but aren't publicly available - help me understand.
It is obvious from your opening comments that you really do not want a discussion on this, But rather want to preach on why mandatory recording should happen. There are a myriad of reasons that it could be a bad idea: Land swaps that did not go through, sales did not finalize, a legitamite difference of opinion as to location, deed issues, theist goes on and on.
Maybe in PLSS states it is easier. But I think you would still have issue with SPC using different datums and some person who does not know any better telling you that you shorted a section line because they typed in two different NAD'83 coordinate systems not realizing they are slightly different.
Here, we put caps on irons. Surveyors know who is wh by the caps and can get copies of maps from each other.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Then there are the halfass recording laws that exclude over half of the surveys made.
Jawja, post: 432946, member: 12766 wrote: It is obvious from your opening comments that you really do not want a discussion on this, But rather want to preach on why mandatory recording should happen. There are a myriad of reasons that it could be a bad idea: Land swaps that did not go through, sales did not finalize, a legitamite difference of opinion as to location, deed issues, theist goes on and on.
Maybe in PLSS states it is easier. But I think you would still have issue with SPC using different datums and some person who does not know any better telling you that you shorted a section line because they typed in two different NAD'83 coordinate systems not realizing they are slightly different.
Here, we put caps on irons. Surveyors know who is wh by the caps and can get copies of maps from each other.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
How does the public get those maps? Your State licenses you to protect the public, does it not?
JKinAK, post: 432942, member: 7219 wrote: In a recent Ring, ring posting there was a lot of discussion about recording surveys and states that don't have recording laws. In November of 2013 Shawn BIllings posted a poll looking for info on if your state was PLSS or not and whether or not it was mandatory to record a survey. There seem to be more than a few states without recording laws.
Given that boundary survey records:
- help protect property rights and the fabric of the cadastre;
- increase the likelihood of quiet enjoyment of title;
- reduce the potential for survey error based gaps/overlaps;
- give you and every other surveyor more basis to accept/reject found monumentation;
- protect and perpetuate your survey;
- makes corner cutters think a little longer about which corners to cut since their mistakes/shoddy work will be of record.I just don't understand how anyone can defend the absence of recording laws.
If your state does NOT have a recording law - Please share:
1. What state you are answering about;
2. Does your state survey society support adding a recording law?
[INDENT]A) If so - have the tried to introduce legislation?
[INDENT]i) If so - what happened with that effort?[/INDENT]
B) If not - what is the rationale behind making boundary info difficult or impossible to obtain?[/INDENT]If your state DOES have a recording law - Please share:
1. What state you are answering about;
2. Is the survey subject to review?The goal is to get everyone working from the same set of facts.
I could see the review being onerous. Fortunately, Alaska does NOT require review of any type if the survey being recorded is NOT subdividing land (and no local authority can legally require such a review).I just don't see an upside for the survey community or for the public when surveys occur but aren't publicly available - help me understand.
1. Arizona
2. No review of anything other than Subdivision Plats, Minor Land Divisions, Parcel Splits, etc.
Jawja, post: 432946, member: 12766 wrote: It is obvious from your opening comments that you really do not want a discussion on this, But rather want to preach on why mandatory recording should happen. There are a myriad of reasons that it could be a bad idea: Land swaps that did not go through, sales did not finalize, a legitamite difference of opinion as to location, deed issues, theist goes on and on.
Maybe in PLSS states it is easier. But I think you would still have issue with SPC using different datums and some person who does not know any better telling you that you shorted a section line because they typed in two different NAD'83 coordinate systems not realizing they are slightly different.
Here, we put caps on irons. Surveyors know who is wh by the caps and can get copies of maps from each other.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Your reasoning only supports JK's assertions. Whenever ambiguous things happen, publicly available records help everyone.
Jawja, post: 432946, member: 12766 wrote: It is obvious from your opening comments that you really do not want a discussion on this, But rather want to preach on why mandatory recording should happen. There are a myriad of reasons that it could be a bad idea: Land swaps that did not go through, sales did not finalize, a legitamite difference of opinion as to location, deed issues, theist goes on and on.
Maybe in PLSS states it is easier. But I think you would still have issue with SPC using different datums and some person who does not know any better telling you that you shorted a section line because they typed in two different NAD'83 coordinate systems not realizing they are slightly different.
Here, we put caps on irons. Surveyors know who is wh by the caps and can get copies of maps from each other.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
"...a legitamite(sic) difference of opinion as to location..."
This is EXACTLY why things should be recorded!!
Jim in AZ, post: 432948, member: 249 wrote: How does the public get those maps? Your State licenses you to protect the public, does it not?
Well, let's see: part of my practice is to talk to the adjoiners. So I generally have a feeling of what is going on. Then, I actually have the adjoining info, so if something does not fit, I am aware of it. Then, if I find an issue, I typically send a copy of my map to that adjoiners show the issues that I found. I do not play cover up as you imply; so, no, I really do not lose sleep about the public.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Jim in AZ, post: 432953, member: 249 wrote: "...a legitamite(sic) difference of opinion as to location..."
This is EXACTLY why things should be recorded!!
No, that is why attorneys were created. You do not make boundary decisions, courts do. If it is legitimate, then you ahow the gap/gore/ encroachments and both parties have a copy of the map. Your job is done.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Jawja, post: 432946, member: 12766 wrote: It is obvious from your opening comments that you really do not want a discussion on this, But rather want to preach on why mandatory recording should happen. There are a myriad of reasons that it could be a bad idea: Land swaps that did not go through, sales did not finalize, a legitamite difference of opinion as to location, deed issues, theist goes on and on.
Maybe in PLSS states it is easier. But I think you would still have issue with SPC using different datums and some person who does not know any better telling you that you shorted a section line because they typed in two different NAD'83 coordinate systems not realizing they are slightly different.
Here, we put caps on irons. Surveyors know who is wh by the caps and can get copies of maps from each other.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
What about 75 years from now when everyone is dead and the records are in the landfill?
Jawja, post: 432957, member: 12766 wrote: No, that is why attorneys were created. You do not make boundary decisions, courts do. If it is legitimate, then you ahow the gap/gore/ encroachments and both parties have a copy of the map. Your job is done.
Sent from my SM-G955U using
Well, let's see: part of my practice is to talk to the adjoiners. So I generally have a feeling of what is going on. Then, I actually have the adjoining info, so if something does not fit, I am aware of it. Then, if I find an issue, I typically send a copy of my map to that adjoiners show the issues that I found. I do not play cover up as you imply; so, no, I really do not lose sleep about the public.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
If you are sending copies to the adjoiners then what is the problem recording? One of the benifits of recording is ensuring the adjoiners have access to the survey. This is most important when there is differing opinions. I don't understand what the problem is with land swaps and sales that don't go through. How does that relate to recording surveys?
Jawja, post: 432957, member: 12766 wrote: No, that is why attorneys were created. You do not make boundary decisions, courts do. If it is legitimate, then you ahow the gap/gore/ encroachments and both parties have a copy of the map. Your job is done.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
I make boundary decisions everyday.
aliquot, post: 432963, member: 2486 wrote: I make boundary decisions everyday.
Yep. Not sure what they're doing back there in "Jawja" if they're not making boundary decisions and recording the results. Doesn't even sound like a fun hobby. I guess if all the documentation ends up in the client's sock drawer, then no harm done.
Dave, in 75 years your electronic copy will be gone too.
A liquor, you make boundary opinions. Keep thinking you determine the boundary and one day a judge may explain the difference to you.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Our Recorder's Office has all of the maps recorded in our County since the 1800's, in 75 years today's maps will be there too. It's a good system.[
Jawja, post: 432967, member: 12766 wrote: Dave, in 75 years your electronic copy will be gone too.
A liquor, you make boundary opinions. Keep thinking you determine the boundary and one day a judge may explain the difference to you.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
Aliquot explains boundaries to Judges, may you learn that one day.
Jawja, post: 432946, member: 12766 wrote: There are a myriad of reasons that it could be a bad idea: Land swaps that did not go through, sales did not finalize, a legitamite difference of opinion as to location, deed issues, theist goes on and on.
That's what I'm hoping to learn. It's a list that I haven't encountered. You can't do reconfigure property in this jurisdiction without going through the subdivision process so I've never encountered a survey based on a speculative swap or a sale - I can see that as a legitimate reason to not record a survey. I have seen surveys based on a subdivision that was underway but never completed - these surveys aren't legally recordable because they aren't a survey of any deeded land or subdivided land or anything else - they have nothing to do with real property interests until the subdivision is approved by the platting authority and recorded.
In this jurisdiction, when there is a legitimate difference of opinion about location, the second surveyor has access to the first survey (the one they don't concur with). This gives the second surveyor the opportunity to consider what the first surveyor did before coming up with a different location. Typically the second surveyor calls the first one and they go through the evidence and, often, come to the same conclusion. It's a cooperative thing not a competitive thing - both want the right answer.
Deed issues... I guess there are a bunch of types of deed issues - if they relate to the location and configuration of the subject property - I'd want to get my interpretation of the deed into the record. If someone comes along to survey an adjoiner, they can see what I did and if it's in harmony with the evidence they have and it's feasible to accept my solution - I suspect they would. If my solution didn't line up with the evidence they have then I believe they'd call me and we'd discuss it. There may or may not be basis for a valid resolution based on the two sets of data but at least there was the opportunity to resolve the problem prior to resorting to a judicial solution. Can you provide a theoretical situation where it would be good to NOT record a survey showing all parties what was done to resolve location and configuration issues found in the deed.
I admit - I'm ignorant about when it makes sense to NOT record a survey. You gave a good example of one such situation with the survey in support of a speculative land swap/sale. That's a situation that never exists in this jurisdiction because the recording law won't let you subdivide land (unless you go through the platting process). One of the benefits of being in the 49th State is that we had the opportunity to cherry pick the best laws and processes from 48 older states (unfortunately we weren't always good at distinguishing which laws were cherries and which were just cherry pits).
Let's hear some more reasons why recording laws aren't so good.
Jawja, post: 432957, member: 12766 wrote: No, that is why attorneys were created. You do not make boundary decisions, courts do. If it is legitimate, then you ahow the gap/gore/ encroachments and both parties have a copy of the map. Your job is done.
Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk
If the Surveyor does his job, the lawyers all starve.
The harder information is to find, the hard it makes your job. The only complaint I have with recording is that some counties don't understand indexing, but at least the plats are there. I would rather pick up plats from the county then be at the mercy of your competition or maybe an adjacent land owner who thinks he has a secret weapon if he doesn't agree with your boundary location and pulls out his plat when you are setting corners.
JKinAK, post: 432977, member: 7219 wrote: I've never encountered a survey based on a speculative swap or a sale - I can see that as a legitimate reason to not record a survey.
I don't see a problem with this. The deed record tells you whether the swap or sale happened or not. And recording that survey, like any other, preserves information about monumentation.
