Australians... The future reciprocation is implied.
> I don't know if it can be done, but I think that the surveyor-community should be figuring out how to put pressure on road crews to preserve and not totally wipe out primary boundary control, don't you?
Wow, that would be something if you could get crews to preserve brass disk monuments, much less boundary control. The attitude in general seems to be, "Huh, what? Nobody still uses those old monument things. Those are like, pre-historic dude!"
> If I was hungry enough, I would be tempted to lower the fee a little. But it doesn't sound like your customer will go for the whole survey without a substantial reduction. And if you look at it from his point of view, he will think you are willing to negotiate the fee. Soon all your customers will want to haggle.
This is an ethics violation in Alabama.
> Well the county is just finishing up the road project and all the section monuments are gone, along with 99.9% of the references (nails in power poles and fence posts). I called a fellow surveyor in the area and he had actually done the engineering topo for the plans and prepared the RW docs. He emailed me his entire CAD file of 6 miles of topo with boundary info of 12 sections adjacent to the road.
>
> Now I have info that could significantly reduce my price of a boundary of my client's 200 acres. What do you all here think of me starting with the boundary info I have procured from a fellow surveyor to reduce my fees?
Well, do you really have the option of ignoring the fact that this other surveyor had information that may provide the best evidence of where various section corner monuments had actually been in place upon the ground? No?
So, is the issue really how to use that information since you will be assuming liability for the correctness of any work that you base upon it or is the issue just whether or not to adjust your fee, which I assume was a lump sum fee?
I frankly think that lump sum pricing is only ethical if it is known to provide more money than will be necessary to pay for all work needed to be performed in providing a service. So, yes, it is ethical to charge more money than a break-even amount. Unjust enrichment is a natural by-product of lump sum pricing. As long as the original agreement was made without any false representations on your part, I don't see any obligation to revise the agreement just because you later discover that the work will be easier than you had thought.
Murphy's Law is still in operation, you know.
Agree, the surveyors' in that county or state need to be talking to get things changed. Standard practice here is the road commission gets bids from surveying companies to witness all Gov't corners before hand and reset them all after. Great for everyone and good work too.
My modus operandum
is probably a little weird compared to other surveyors (imagine that..).
I am an advocate of private property ownership. I have always felt that some folks, due to finances, avoid a survey because they simply cannot afford our lofty fees. That being said, I don't want to leave the impression that I give work away, I don't. But I do try to work with private individuals to keep my fees reasonable.
At this point in my career I have the opportunity to do just that. I have corporate clients that keep my company cookie jar full. I do not lack for work. I get to 'cherry-pick' private property surveys and I take the ones that I think are interesting or fun or maybe just to help out some old hayseed that is "land poor". It is something that makes my days worthwhile sometimes.
With the info that I picked up from another surveyor I will be able to get my client what he wants and needs, all within his budget. I don't have a problem with doing that, I just wanted to hear what others on the board here thought about it. I love the diversity of opinions. Everything from obsessive retentive to obsessive explosive!
I'll still make money, don't worry. I just don't feel the need to maximize my fees and profits from private individuals. My larger clients keep my outfit well oiled and sometimes it's just fun to survey. There are plenty of other surveyors around here that, in my opinion, don't have clients...they have victims.
And yes Kent, you are exactly right. My fellow surveyor's information may be the only available evidence that exists to re-establish my client's boundary correctly.
> Agree, the surveyors' in that county or state need to be talking to get things changed. Standard practice here is the road commission gets bids from surveying companies to witness all Gov't corners before hand and reset them all after. Great for everyone and good work too.
In OK if the work is being done by ODOT, the corners will be recovered and referenced, and those plans are available. Some county and city governments will follow those ODOT standards in the absence of any other standards, particularly if state funds are being used. So there is some effort. But a lot of times no references are made and the position is lost.
My modus operandum
Well Mr.Ca$h, if you are that altruistic and magnanimous just refer the client to the other surveyor who did the ROW survey.
😐
> Wow, that would be something if you could get crews to preserve brass disk monuments, much less boundary control. The attitude in general seems to be, "Huh, what? Nobody still uses those old monument things. Those are like, pre-historic dude!"
I agree but think there is more. I think most people simply don't care. It is a bigger pain to save than to toss and pretend like you didn't see it. Also the road crews are just doing their jobs, and it isn't in their job description.
You need ot find a way to convince the county (or whatever agency) to make it part of the contract to preserve these things. You need to pay the road crews to make it part of their job. And require that the prime contractor hire surveyors to do exactly what you need done to perserve the locations of those monuments. (or the public agency responsible for the road work could hire the surveyor directly)
Secondly, you need to hit other companies where it hurts. A utility company comes and digs up the roadway to deal with their utility, they need to be required to hire a surveyor to reference out and replace a monument if it is going to be affected. They are usually in roads by permit (as opposed to by easement), so when they get the permit it needs to have the stipulation added. The county needs to require that the utility preserve the monument and fine them enough to re-establish it if they don't. Even if they were there by easement, I don't think they have the right to destroy other property without replacing it. (the trouble there is they get away with it without anyone knowing.)
There need to be an enforced fine whenever a comnpany comes out and tears out a monument. And that fine needs to cover the cost of reestablishing it.
We had a first-order benchmark hit by a local business that was having landscaping done. We went after the business for the cost of re-establishing a first-order mark. Later, I think word got out, because we started getting more calls from companies when their work might effect a survey mark. If they tell someone in advance a survey mark can be much more easily referenced out from the existing one, than re-established from nothing.
Sorry for the hijack from the primary topic.
My modus operandum
ha ha....
I saw a comercial by the National Realtor's Association that they are advocates of home ownership. I bet I can get them to lower their fees whenever I buy my next home. Ya think?
(You know the markup fee I'm referring to...that 7% fee that they all charge that isn't a product of price-fixing and collusion.) 😀
Man, ten dollar words!
Most usual folks only use four letter words when they talk about me.:snarky:
Me, altruistic?
"Altruism can be distinguished from feelings of loyalty. Pure altruism consists of sacrificing something for someone other than the self (e.g. sacrificing time, energy or possessions) with no expectation of any compensation or benefits, either direct, or indirect (e.g., receiving recognition for the act of giving)."
Not a chance.
I get everything I want. But I don't dirty my chop-whiskers growling and snapping at the everyday road kill that most surveyors live on. That's so feed-trough, if you know what I mean.
Magnanimous?
Magnanimity being derived from the Latin roots magna (great), and animus, mind.
Me, great mind? ha. Not really. I'm just as dumb as the next schmuck. But if you mean magnanimity as the opposite of pusillanimity, maybe. I just do what I want and have no desire to struggle for the illusion of achievement, especially at the expense of others. That, to me, is the definition of futility. B-)
I have been known to apply a "Professional Discount" on lump sum jobs that came in significantly under budget. It actually created more work in more than one case.