> Unless there are some really unusual circumstances, that person needs his/her license revoked, because they don't know how to survey.
>
> When you find a monument you don't agree with, you need to man up and set your own monument, or go ahead and accept what you find. Calling found monuments off by a few fractions of a feet is wussing out.
:good:
It depends
> I would be very careful of calling a building corner from 1950 as "encroaching" and would be more likely to use it to determine other corners; or as a point to proportion to from the other monuments. (just my 0.07' worth).
Hence, the point of my post and use of the .07' referenced. Notice I mentioned the building crossing a line inversed between found monuments, but no "call of encroachment". In fact, you won't see the notation "encroachment" on any of my sketches.
In this case, my sketch would show the blasphemous .07' off label describing found monumentation while holding the building itself as better evidence/monumentation...even though some folks here would call for my license to be revoked. 😉
Ah ha, got it!
I agree. I don't like it and IMO it is a violation of standards here.
I was asked to review a survey of a commercial parcel here. The survey for the tract was done to standards and acceptable. I reviewed the adjoiner plats and a local surveyor had shown offset distances to the title corners without setting a monument.
I think that his 'wisdom' in doing that was that he would not be hold any liability since he was not setting any monuments. Strange thinking and he may have been advised by an attorney in this show but do not set plat procedure.
It is a tremendous disservice to the land owner and public, IMO.
It did eliminate the pin cushion effect but opened up another can of worms.
Robert
Hells bells, some in BLM do that too.
They do not accept the existing corner monument and call for the "true" corner point a finger length distance away and do not monument it.
Professional?
I can only shake my head in amazement!
Keith
> I can only shake my head in amazement!
>
> Keith
Mr. Keith,
Do him one better and explain why you're shaking your aching head in amazement.
Respectfully,
G
In book and case law...uncalled for or unoriginal monuments or monuments of unknown origin can be surpassed by other evidence. If you have other evidence such as calls or plats or deeds or possession that disagree with an uncalled for monument or unknown monument, you are not bound to holding that monument. The courts are weary of these monuments when other evidence exists. I'm not saying that there is not a situation where you will have to hold uncalled monuments...but when other evidence refutes the location of an uncalled and unknown monument you don't have to hold it. Even if that evidence is a collection of other uncalled monuments that works well with other evidence discovered. Again from Bruckner:
When monuments are in conflict, those most clearly satisfying the intent are controlling. If you have 10 uncalled for pins that work with the intended subdivion plat, they will control over the single one that does not, unless there is specific evidence concerning the validity of that monument.
When two monuments are in conflict and either could be as described, the one most harmonious with the dimensions controls
And from Brown’s Evidence and Procedures:
“A deed that calls for bearing and distance but does not call for a monument directly, indirectly, or by reference and is not required by law cannot be altered by giving control to a monument found in the vicinity of the bearing and distance termination.”
The legal intentions of the parties are in the written document that is filed...what we stake is a representation of that intent. If the monuments exit before the contact (or deed) then they need to be included in that contract to hold...ie the deed or plat. 150 years from you can't ask Joe and Bob if that pin was the intent...but you can rely on what they said in writing. If the deed or map calls that pin then that was the intent. If the deed calls 100' each from a 200' line...then that is the intent even if that uncalled unknown pin is at 101 feet. If a deed calls for Lot 10 on Map 2546 then that map controls. If original monuments are found then they control the location of that map on the ground. If no original monuments are found then you must examine the evidence you find to lay that map out on the ground. Some evidence will be held and other evidence will not.
If the original contract or deed says that lot 10 on map 2546 was sold...and lot 10 is 50x100 on that controlling document then that is all that can ever be sold or conveyed, not 50.5 because there is an uncalled and unknown pin there. You have no right to sell 50.5 feet when the original conveyance to you was only 50 feet (other than through different legal procedures such as adverse possession, acquiescence, etc, of which rules vary by state). If there was a called pin on that controlling document and it was labeled 50 feet but it measured 50.5...then the circumstances change.
All that said...there are certainly exceptions...but in general a monument has to be called in some way for it to hold unequivocally from other evidence.
An unknown pin being off by a tenth from the position of the actual corner as we determined it to be can make a big difference in boundary disputes, in where a fence is built, in where a shed is placed, etc. especially on small lots in expensive areas. Yes the court does not concern itself with trivialities but 10k to build then remove a fence is not a trivial matter to most.
And concerning the actual distance...I wrote 0.05'...but you know that's just a base number that I made up in my head as to were I start to take a closer look at stuff. If it's under 0.05' I feel that I can attribute that to location errors on a small job with short lines located from two or three setups (of course we consider the distance traversed, etc for a more refined analysis). The reality is that it does vary by situation. I'm a lot more accepting of larger numbers on a pin in a stone wall a mile in the woods on a deed with +/- distances.
Just as a curiosity, I know my 1/16th corner monuments were not set with a micrometer back in the 60's and 70's when I set them and if you were to do a resurvey on private land against one of those 1/16th corners in the PLSS; would you accept it if it was a link out of position from your measurement?
Keith
To think i went in the field today and missed all this discussion...darn.
> .....All that said...there are certainly exceptions...but in general a monument has to be called in some way for it to hold unequivocally from other evidence.
>
> An unknown pin being off by a tenth from the position of the actual corner as we determined it to be can make a big difference in boundary disputes, in where a fence is built, in where a shed is placed, etc. especially on small lots in expensive areas. Yes the court does not concern itself with trivialities but 10k to build then remove a fence is not a trivial matter to most.
Okay...it sounds like I can go out and dig up an original monument and move it to where it benefits me the most, and you will accept it unequivocally over later monuments (that were there when I moved it) that don't agree.
What about the uncalled for monument that is 0.1' off? How do you know? Maybe it was right on 30 years ago when it was set, but the original monument isn't where it once was. It may be that the 30 year-old monument was more correct back when it was closer in time to when the controlling monuments were set.
If I have seen evidence that an uncalled-for monument has been disturbed (bent, cap torn off, exposed a few tenths, etc.) I might rely on distances from good monuments to better place it. But in my opinion, you need to strongly consider uncalled for monuments. They may have been set by a licensed surveyor, who did it with due diligence and care, and within precisions acceptable at the time it was set. the adjoining property owners may have depended on that location to build improvements or fences. It might be time to reconsider that "original" controlling corner. And what if that original corner is now marked by a different monument than the original call in the deed? How are you going to reset it in its right place? What if it is gone altogether? I would probably set it from the local "uncalled for" control as opposed to going back to earlier originals and trying to place it by bearing and distance. I would have a hard time setting it 3-feet away from an existing local control becuase that original platted bearing didn't check.
I just think it's more complicated than you are describing. I have a tendency to want to rely on existing monuments (called or uncalled for) over a bearing and distance that may not be coming from the exact same point as it was when the description was made.
Good grief, now the proverbial 0.04' has changed to 0.07'??? My head is spinning, too. UNEXPECTED ERROR ENCOUNTERED, SHUTTING DOWN
Jeff Lucas should print this one out and give a 4 hour seminar. He would be screaming at the class by the time he was done. I know he feels pretty strongly about holding found monuments.
Robert
yea, I would feel funny speaking to a client/consumer that called me to ask where his corner is located in the yard and tell him to take the plat and a compass/ tape to the yard to find another rebar and measure it from the rebar and then also tell him to convert the feEt/tenths on the plat to feet/inches if he did not have a surveyor's tape.
Plus tell him to refresh his basic trig if he had any to find the hypotenuese distance also.
CLARIFICATION NEEDED
What was the original subdivision like? Nearest foot without bearings? Fully surveyed and published to the hundredth and say 20" bearings? Something better, something worse?
I will happily break some old plans, I am more hesitant with new modern plans.
The courts are weary of these monuments when other evidence exists.
Now that I beleive. The courts probably do grow weary of pin cushion or implied pin cushion monuments when other evidence of the established boundary exists.
:good:
> Jeff Lucas should print this one out and give a 4 hour seminar. He would be screaming at the class by the time he was done. I know he feels pretty strongly about holding found monuments.
LOL
I will be attending Jeff's "The Pincushion Effect" on Friday at Little Rock. I'll print it out and give it to him at the end of the seminar.;-)
DDSM:beer:
I can only imagine how he will shake his head and it will only enforce his opinion about some surveyors.
Mr. Keith
> I can only imagine how he will shake his head and it will only enforce his opinion about some surveyors.
Mr. Keith,
Will he shake his head at the missed opportunities to teach?
IMHO, your posts to this thread serve neither to teach nor enlighten but rather betray your inability to convey knowledge you supposedly gained from a position with the BLM. How old are you? Is it so difficult to nurture others in your chosen profession rather than condemn? 10 posts and all anyone knows is you're amazed and have a headache.
Oh well. Carry on.
G