In my haste to post (posthaste?), I might not have mentioned one or two facts.
The overlap occurs several lots removed from locus. The controlling monuments were missed by the previous surveyor. As there is only one monument at locus and I am holding these other three, I have resolved a line that is not my client's.
The attorney may have been involved in the conveyancing of the overlapping lots.
So, if you know there was a survey bungle and it has little to do with locus, should you show it. I certainly don't want some surveyor calling me in 20 years asking if I knew about this overlap.
Mine may be a minority opinion. I would put out the word to parties affected. Essentially protecting the public. Yes, I might come under assault from some sloppybutt so-called surveyor who screwed the pooch, but, I say, bring it on. This profession does not need to continue to suffer quietly from the misdeeds of our brethren.
i attempted to contact the original surveyor with no response
i did contact the firm who was preparing the site plans and provided them with the sketch. the purchasers were not pleased, but i got the word out.
then the original surveyor issued an affidavit that his surveys were good because of a variety of reasons including Planning Board Approval. (These were approval not required plans - the planning board only certifies that the division is not a subdivision per MGL ch 41, 81-L)
nobody is going to be hunting you down in 20 years looking for you in Croatia! Give me that surveyors name and I'll call him, and then you know the next step, if there isn't a response.....
What does planning board approval have to do with the survey being correct? He prepared an affidavit stating such?!?!? :-S
-V
Not an affidavit, a laughidavit!
But it does lead to a question: if you find an overlap off locus but you still need to show the area on the plan, do you show the overlap?
A small key map or vicinity map of the subdivision and the adjoining parcels would be one way of showing the situation without the need to make too many comments. That would make it clear that the overlap exists, as well as the gap that presumably also exists on the other side of the mis-placed subdivision. By labeling/shading the lot you surveyed, you could then show that these problems are not directly adjacent to it.
You could add a note suggesting that your clients obtain legal advice "as to the effect, if any, of this situation on the surveyed parcel." That would do away with any suggestion that you are offering legal opinions, and the attorney would have to get to work looking up some case law instead of trying to sweep the matter under the rug.
I think a knowledgeable title-company attorney would be OK with insuring the boundaries of your surveyed parcel under the circumstances. The realtor involved, if there is one, would likely be willing to pursue that. Things would quiet down then.
