Ok, here is the situation....
About four months ago, Property Owner shows up on his property (absent owner only in town due to business once a month or so) and there are survey stakes ALL over the place... Problem is what is marked as the property line is approximately 30 feet West of the property line. The Property line per the PLAT is the center line of a dry branch. There is also a Drainage easement staked out that is twice what is plotted on the subdivision plat. In short, this eats up approximately one-third of the lot....
Other side of the dry branch is a town park and it is also staked.
Property owner contacts friends that are on the town board to find out what the hell is going on... They know nothing but promise to investigate...
Move it forward about a month or so. Property owner is in town again. This time, there is construction equipment parked on the property. The berm at the top of the creek has been removed and dirt taken off site. This means the water can more easily flow of the creek over the subject property.
Property owner calls local police and makes a report for trespass.
Responding officer calls chief of police who tells him to have the property owner call the airport manager that it "might" be an airport project... Never mind the airport is over three miles away. Or that the Police Chief is on the airport board.
Over the next month, Property owner engages in phone tag with the airport manager.
About two months ago, property owner at a public function talks with the President of the Town Board. He promises that he will look into it...
Veterans Day weekend, the property owner is again in town. Finds that the Corners of the Lot have been recovered and marked. And in the "Drainage easement" there are approximately 100 to 150 trees planted.
Drives to the Airport. Airport manager is not there. Gets the number of the President of the Airport Board.
Leaves a message for the President.
Drives to town gets President of Town Board and takes to the site.
Where we have CHANGED the COURSE of the Dry Branch (remember that the center line is the property line on the subdivision plat.
The Drainage easement has been expanded by approximately TWICE what was plated...
Town Board President is PISSED. First, no one from the airport had contacted the property owner as he had directed. The response was they had talked to the property owners dad so didn't think they really needed to talk to the property owner....
Second he is pissed that the way the dry branch has been channeled it is going to make flooding more of an issue for the property owner...
His words: "This is totally hosed! I'm not an engineer but can tell this is going to be a problem with water flowing over your property. The way this has been done is also going to be prone to erosion..... We WILL make this right...."
About that time the owners cell phone rings and it is the President of the Airport Board... He is nice and acknowledges that he was just made aware of the problem the day before and he is attempting to get the engineers together. Seems that the ORIGINAL engineering firm has been fired mid project and a new firm takes over in mid project. yatta, yatta, yatta. Only after the property owners mother had caught them planting the trees and stopped them did the new engineering company hire a surveyor to mark the corners & property lines. Promises he will get back with the owner...
The following Wednesday, President of the Airport Board calls with an update....
THIS IS THE GOOD PART.....
The original engineering firm didn't have a survey done... They scales the property line off the County GIS which is on line... The GIS shows the property line at approximately 20 feet west of the center line of the Dry Branch. Where we get the drainage easement width is still unanswered... Where we get the idea that planting TREES in a drainage easement is ok is still unanswered.
Property Owner has a a meeting this weekend with the Air board and engineers from BOTH Firms. His question is what should he ask for?
My thought is that the first question should be why the hell he shouldn't report the original engineering firm for gross incompetence and professional negligence?
Suggestions?
My, oh, my. That is a bad deal for sure.
There is plenty of blame to go around. As a landowner, I would hire a very capable attorney well-versed in real property matters and start a barrage of action against both engineering firms and all town/city officials/committees involved. No need to go to court to resolve matters. Provide all local media outlets with this assault on property rights by idiots and non-thinking bureaucrats. Insist on complete remediation plus damages to include all attorney fees and related expenses.
Sounds like a pretty sticky situation. As a surveyor, not an attorney, i would be very careful about handing out legal advice on this one.
OK... I'll give you a little more information
I am the property owner....
OK... I'll give you a little more information
Raise hell and don't give up until you are made whole again.
I would throw the engineers and any township piliticians under the bus ASAP. Let them squirm and deal with the negative publicity.
And please keep us up to date.
OK... I'll give you a little more information
> Raise hell and don't give up until you are made whole again.
> I would throw the engineers and any township piliticians under the bus ASAP. Let them squirm and deal with the negative publicity.
> And please keep us up to date.
IMHO, both engineering firms can be charged with negligence and incompetence. The first firm for obvious reasons, and the second firm because they appeared to accept the location of the property lines as delineated by the first firm. It was not until the mother did something that the 2nd firm retained a surveyor.
The Township officials appear to have not been aware of the debacle until partway through, and once they were made aware, they appeared to take steps to help resolve the issue. Based on what was posted, I do not think the Township should be charged.
Lastly, could the first engineering firm be brought in front of the State Surveying Board and charged with surveying without a license? On the surface this appears to be what happened with the GIS BS... I'd like to see others opinion on this.
OK... I'll give you a little more information
You have to decide how bad the damage to your property is and how it impacts its use. If it ruins the property, ask that it be restored or that they buy you out. If it's not a major problem, decide how much cash would make you feel better.
Another awful GIS
Fiasco!!!
Sorry man, we fight this cr-p all the time. I feel for you. It could very well be that the first engineering firm was using the garbage in the GIS for preliminary design drawings intending to tighten them up later, then got fired and the second firm ran with the junk. It’s still inexcusable of course! You need to hope that they have good insurance to cover the mess.
Another awful GIS
Well, Joe...
I might by the tightening up theory IF,
it wasn't for the fact that The actual work on the project started BEFORE they were fired.
There were disparaging remarks made by the engineers when brought to their attention to the effect that, "property owners never know where their property lines are and what they actually own.......
And finally, they tried to throw the County Surveyor under the bus claiming that he said that the GIS was totally accurate...
Oh yeah and then there is this classic, "Well the DNR approved it!..."
My biggest problem with this is, They were paid BIG, BIG bucks.
They took short cuts that should not have been taken....
They played the "WE ARE the PROFESSIONALS" card
I told the President of the air board I am NOT mad at them.. They hired a "professional" firm who did not do DUE diligence.
But that the FIRST Question that the ENGINEER needs to be able to answer for me is WHY I should not go straight to the BOARD and ask for their license to practice?
Another awful GIS
I don't see this as a GIS debacle. I see it simply as an unprofessional work product falling well below the standard of care prepared by an engineering company. I also see it as an unprofessional use of an unprofessional work product perpetuated by the second engineering company being further perpetuated by a surveyor who laid the project out on the ground where the obvious trespass occurred. When the professions fail in their one primary duty (protection of the public), this is the result.
You've got three options: Push for an administrative action against the licensed professionals involved (which may result in sanctions or fines by the licensing division) which will do nothing to compensate the owner for their loss but will provide a good-bad example for the rest of the profession as well as those involved; push for a criminal trespass action against the owners, the contractors, and the engineering and surveying firms; and, file a civil action against all three for civil trespass, willful-wanton disregard for property rights, tort negligence, and the kitchen sink. The owner might only be able to bring an action against the owners who might have to enjoin the others in the lawsuit. The adjoining owner, potentially hiding under a veil of sovereignty, might really muddy the waters.
Best outcome would be the owners (municipalities) will make their best attempt at mitigating or restoring the damage caused. They would then determine if there is reasonable cause for going after the engineers and contractors for breach of contract, negligence, gross negligence, etc. Chances are, the risk won't be worth the fight. The taxpayers pay to fix the problem to the near-satisfaction of the owner, and the professionals walk away untouched (good reason for the administrative complaint to be filed). Hopefully, the municipality was smart enough to confirm that the engineers had E&O coverage, and will be able to recover from the E&O policy through negotiations without litigation. Best outcome for everyone.
JBS
Another awful GIS
- 1) Why would you be inclined to not report?
- 2) If you are a licensee, are you not required to report?
- 3) Wouldn't a finding of gross negligence by your BOR lend some weight to any litigation you are pursuing?
Another awful GIS
JB..
I will agree that this is not a GIS mess...
Other than the individual at the County promotes this as 100% accurate and "you don't need a survey...." the picture is clear.... That work for the average joe off the streets they don't know better. For an Engineering firm to attempt HIDE behind this "excuse" is in my mind criminal....
I am NOt going with the let the tax payers pick up the tab. I own property there and pay taxes there. I don't think that the TAX payers created the PROBLEM. Why do you think they should Pay to fix it?
I agree the engineering is FLAWED and they should pay to do it right, and I'm not sure about that either.
Another awful GIS
Another thought:
The main reason they need to be turned is the fact that, while in this case, there seems to have been no immediate danger to persons, the BOR needs to review past work by this firm ASAP to try to determine if their shoddy practice has placed anyone else in danger.
Did they design that dam upriver from your town, the multi-million yard detention pond next to the hospital? There are too many examples of poor engineering leading to tragedy.
This seems to be much bigger than a mis-location of some improvements and would likely indicate a systematic problem with this firm.
Surveying errors lend themselves to civil matters.
Engineering errors can, and do, lead to dead folks.
Thank You JB...
You are EXACTLY correct...
Thank you for making this so clear.
I am totally disgusted by what has happened here.
Another awful GIS
> I am NOt going with the let the tax payers pick up the tab. I own property there and pay taxes there. I don't think that the TAX payers created the PROBLEM. Why do you think they should Pay to fix it?
I didn't mean to leave the impression that the taxpayers should pick up the tab. In my experience, however, they usually end up picking up the tab because no one has the cojones to pursue the effort of administrative and/or civil action. The likelihood for this outcome to be different will hinge on the ability of the municipality to negotiate settlement with the E&O carrier. Other than that option, the cost of litigation will likely exceed the cost to repair the problem. Hence, the taxpayers will save money by paying to fix it rather than litigate it.
Granted, the only ones who should pay are the ones who screwed the pooch. Sic 'em!
JBS
Someone hit the nail on the head way before me....
Another awful GIS
I will agree that this is not a GIS mess...
Other than the individual at the County promotes this as 100% accurate and "you don't need a survey...."
Therein lies the problem. 20’”off” on a property line is no big deal inside a program that is basically a catalog of land information that should be used as a rough idea of property shapes, ownerships, addresses, zoning, ect.
But when it is represented and used as something it isn’t then that is a problem. And too often it is and by the very people who should know better. That causes harm to the public. And it happens all the time.
As far as Major's problem, this is why companies and governments carry insurance.
Someone hit the nail on the head way before me....
The term geomasochist comes to mind
This is a repost in the same thread, but I wanted to get people's input on this one point.
Along with reporting the firm(s) to the BOR for engineering negligence and incompetence, shouldn't the firm(s), or at least the first firm be charged with practicing surveying without a license?
They set stakes in the ground relying on incorrect data and purported to be staking the property line, then the 2nd firm relied on that data to move earth.
What do people think?
I'm curious, just about every GIS I've seen has a click-through screen with the "The information here should not be relied on by anyone for any reason" type disclaimer. Is the county really representing this as 100% accurate?
Other than that, your client needs to get a lawyer and run everyone involved through the ringer. As a surveyor, you should limit your discussion to surveying matters, i.e., where the properties lines, where the easement is, and why the GIS map does not accurately represent the boundary lines ... Let the lawyer handle badgering the engineers. The lawyer might want to file the complaint against the company himself, since having the BOR rule "incompetence" in the matter would make his case a slam dunk.