Bow Tie Surveyor:
Boundary Surveys only benefit the buyers; I think that is why they won't become widespread.
The other side of this is lender acceptance of previous (10 - 20 years old) MLS documents combined with a sellers affidavit in place of a new MLS. The seller signs a statement that there have been no changes to the property since the survey. The general public often has no idea that utility service upgrades, public road improvements and other actions they have forgotten make changes. The seller trying to save time and money without knowing about the additional liability they are accepting.
And/or the possibility that their insurance won't cover the shortcoming.
Let's get one thing straight about these . . . "things".
> The problem I identified and posted is in your home county.
>
No surprise there Delaware County has been one of the fastest growing counties in Ohio and the U.S. for over 20 years. If there is a way to cut corners it is more likely to happen here.
> At this point I don't think it is in the best interest of the public to say that the solution is to simply try to better enforce OAC 4733-38-05. It was written largely by "mortgage surveyors" having a significant financial and political influence in the legislature and PLSO. As you say, there is no record of enforcement except for the most blatant examples plan stamping violations.
>
Wasn't directly involved in writing the draft standard. I know, as well as you, who was and had conversations with several of them at the time. Their hope at the time was much the same as yours now. Weed out the bad actors and make this product a way to tell the banks and real estate agents "This property needs a new survey." Time has proven the other "real estate professions" just want the box checked and don't disrupt the deal! Would like to know if one of the surveyors that drafted the standard was involved in your son's MLS. Email in profile works and I agree either properly police the MINIMUM STANDARD or outlaw the product.
> The "surveyors" who are attempting to follow it and the title companies which are attempting to understand it appear to be hopelessly lost, to the disadvantage of the public (my post below has more on this).
>
> I am sorry that I have not followed this situation more closely over the years, as it was far outside my area of practice. I am now of the opinion that we need to follow the example of other states, such as Texas, and simply eliminate the "mortgage survey" and replace it with the "boundary survey".
>
Since about 1991 it has also been outside of my area of practice. Only started to pay attention again when a few years ago one of my students asked me to explain a few things on his MLS. Try explaining MLS standards to a basic surveying student in a class requiring a 1:5000 traverse closure to support topo location. Response "What do you mean this is a survey to determine if a real survey is needed?"
> We already have the legal precedent in Ohio, as I understand it, that title companies will not be replacing surveyors with their own non-registered employees who will produce drawings which will be billed to consumers at closing as a "survey".
>
Yes we have that and a few of the title companies have created captive survey companies as a result. However, my fear is if we eliminate the MLS we open the door to a return of some type of title company property inspection to determine if a full survey is required. It will only be a name change and likely instead of a plot a written report prepared by the title company. Title companies would naturally refer to the county GIS and eliminate field work. Even less protection of the public and more fees in the title company coffers.
> Let's just repeal OAC 4733-38 completely. I am going to work toward that end and I know it will be an uphill battle against dollars and not sense. We are responsible to the public ahead of title companies and lenders.
