Request: Simply to change the names on the map

I'm in a small town / rural area, and $5500 is way up there on the scale of fees I charge, and I rely on word-of-mouth for work.

I'd tell them $5500 plus my time for the revisions/updating, and once paid, I'd give the first client their $5500 back, if I wanted to stay in business.

....AND I'd make certain the realtor, if she referred me to both clients, knew I'd done that.

SS

Quick first response

Just got a private call from another professional surveyor. He suggests going back to the land to verify nothing has changed, then revise and reprint the map. Maybe charge $400 or $500 dollars to the real buyers.

Any other ideas? Thanks

The only info that would need to be changed would be the names of who the property is being surveyed for.

You are still on the hood for any liability to the previous buyer.

This would be opening the door for new liability to the new buyer.

I would change the names and charge them $5,500 for a new survey.

If they did not like that they can always go to the previous buyers and deal over their copies of the survey.

Title companies and banks only want an acceptable survey, they do not necessarily care about who paid for the survey.

0.02

I kind of like where you're going. Maybe if each one paid around half instead of returning all the money the first guy spent. Give the new guy a deal and give something back to the old guy. They might both think you are fair and would want to come back to you.

The original buyer is out $5500 for a survey they aren't going to use. I wouldn't concern myself with how and why people spend their money. They can buy the liability from you or they can compensate the original client for the transfer of liability. Once you change the name, you are no longer liable to the original client.

Why is the seller not involved here? He should get his property ready for the sale.

You have the opportunity to make a bundle on this project.

I would charge them $5500 and split the money with the first buyer.

Ain't no way on earth I would let the second buyer off cheap because the first buyer was an honest client.

This was discussed sometime in the last couple of weeks if you want to see the previous posts.

James

Quick first response

You have discovered how a Realtor claim he gets surveys for $400.

> What would you do?

Well, land surveyors aren't in the business of selling maps, we're in the business of selling reliable information about specific tracts of land for specific purposes.

Essentially, this is identical to an update, where you are extending your liability for the correctness of your information to some new lender or title insurer. The way I bill that is to charge:

- a base fee
- time and expenses to do what is reasonably necessary to verify that the map and accompanying documents remain correct representations of the property.

At a minimum, I'd think you'll review the new committment for title insurance, revisit the property, and produce a new map and/or reports to accompany it that are tailored to the new transaction, i.e. referencing new committment and certifying correctness to new buyers and/or lenders.

I would think that a base fee of at least 40% would be not be unreasonable at all.

I would request that the client pay me a fee of likely 60% of the original invoice. This would then allow me to return about half that to the original client. I get a nice price for an update, the 2nd buyer gets a deal and the first client gets a refund of some of his money...Great chance to win a lifetime customer or 2.

Quick first response

> Just got a private call from another professional surveyor. He suggests going back to the land to verify nothing has changed, then revise and reprint the map. Maybe charge $400 or $500 dollars to the real buyers.
>

That's exactly what I was thinking.

TC,

For what I call an update survey, if its less than six months old we charge 60? of the original cost. If its older than six months 100? or more. B-)

I will ask what the title company would do, would they offer a cheaper closing cost since they already did all the work for the first buyer, and they just have to change a name as well.

This is another reason surveyors should not get paid at closing.

Maybe the first buyers saw something in your survey they didn't like. That has happen to me before, saw an easement on the land they didn't want. Paid me for the survey and thanked me for showing it and saving them years of headaches.

Why are the "buyers" names on a survey?

Because they paid for it, If I pay for something I expect to see my name on it.

> Why are the "buyers" names on a survey?

That's not an uncommon request from my part of the country.

I'm agreeing with those that say charge a significant fee and then give part of it back to the first buyer.

I also agree with whoever said there is no way in hell the new buyer get's off cheap simply because he is second in line.

"Because they paid for it, If I pay for something I expect to see my name on it."

I try to never work for a buyer. If the deal falls through you can't file a lien against the owner. I certainly would never put their name on it.

It's customary here for the owner to pay for the survey - then they have documentation of what they own and what they are selling. It usually increases the selling price far more than the cost of the survey.

Jim,

We do things a little differently here in Florida. Surveyors (also architects and engineers too) have a special lien law that does not require the surveyor to be in privity with the land owner, nor is the surveyor required to file "notice to owner". We have 90 days from date of last service to file a lien in the county where the land is located, then (failing full compensation) we have 1 year to bring suit to have the land sold for satisfaction of the lien.

Also, Florida surveyors are advised to make the map "Certified Only To" to limit who can sue. In the instant case here, the map is "Certified Only To" (the client).

ubenhavin(?)

> > What would you do?
>
> Well, land surveyors aren't in the business of selling maps, we're in the business of selling reliable information about specific tracts of land for specific purposes.
>
> Essentially, this is identical to an update, where you are extending your liability for the correctness of your information to some new lender or title insurer. The way I bill that is to charge:
>
> - a base fee
> - time and expenses to do what is reasonably necessary to verify that the map and accompanying documents remain correct representations of the property.
>
> At a minimum, I'd think you'll review the new committment for title insurance, revisit the property, and produce a new map and/or reports to accompany it that are tailored to the new transaction, i.e. referencing new committment and certifying correctness to new buyers and/or lenders.
>
> I would think that a base fee of at least 40% would be not be unreasonable at all.

:good: