When performing a property boundary survey I always pull current subject parcel's records and all adjoiners. If there is any hint of a reason to go further back, then I do, until there is no longer a reason and that usually means until parcel creation.
The reasons could be anything, from adjoining parcel descriptions not matching one another, to an illegible description, to monumentation or occupation not making sense in the field, to any statements of the owners.
If there is no problem, then..... then there is no problem.
According to Kent and some others there is no way to apply senior rights until you have researched back to the creation of each line of your parcel. My experience is that we don't apply senior rights until there is a need to apply them. Similar to a simultaneous subdivision, you apportion distances between found monuments, but only as a last resort. The first thing you do is to retrace and find your parcel's monuments. No problem, then no apportionment. Same with senior rights; no problem, no senior rights.
And just to give some perspective, expecting to find an iron at 200.0' and finding it at 200.3' is almost always not a problem. Not absolute, but almost always.
For the most part, that is how we do it around here.
Doing otherwise takes us down the rabbit hole of forever fine tuning property boundaries.
Stephen
Research Back to Parcel Creation
The way that I would pose the question is in terms of what I as the buyer would want to know about potential problems with the boundaries of the property that I was purchasing. Not looking beneath the surface of the last transaction is like the termite inspector who doesn't go into the crawl space because the last three houses he inspected didn't have evidence of termites there.
Research Back to Parcel Creation
> The way that I would pose the question is in terms of what I as the buyer would want to know about potential problems with the boundaries of the property that I was purchasing. Not looking beneath the surface of the last transaction is like the termite inspector who doesn't go into the crawl space because the last three houses he inspected didn't have evidence of termites there.
If the adjoining parcel descriptions agree and monumentation and occupation more of less agree, and there is not a red flag, such as an ancient RR R/W, or an old grown over trail of some kind then what could the problems be that would not be cured by repose?
Stephen
i pull the original deed that created any of the lines of the current parcel and the deed to the current since the current parcel is usually a fractional part of some senior tract(s). in the instance that a line of the current parcel is a portion of a senior/parent line, how would you know that you are in the senior/parent line w/out researching the line and locating it on the ground?
this is one of my pet peeves, folks don't do adequate research or on the ground locations and then go create gaps or overlaps using deed info that doesn't work on the ground.
i survey lines not corners. that being said...i tie the end monuments and corner monuments along a senior/parent line to calculate the line and for verification that the corners are in the line. the senior/parent line holds, not some uncalled for two-bit iron that a less than concientious(sp) surveyor set erroneously w/out finding the line.
That's a tough question to answer with any kind of absolute. Typically the original is not all that hard to find. It's the mesne conveyances that are usually tough and many times contain need to know information. Places in the chain where people have died, conveyed non-possessory rights, conveyed in and out of corporations, etc..
I go back until I am comfortable about each of the lines. I go back further if I have to. The problem (at least in colonial states) is that to get to that original deed you can spend 200 years with illegible handwritten deeds (mostly due to age, only sometimes hand writting), calls to things that have been gone for a hundred years, and completely different road/land layouts. This goes all the way back to the kings patents. I have traced deeds back to as early as 1696 once when surveying along a patent line. I believe I had around 70 documents for this one parcel alone. At 0.50 per page and $10 per map, it was almost $300 in documents alone. It took around 2 days of research time by my senior guy to get back that far so thats another $400 in direct salary alone.
It' just not necessary a lot of the time and even when you get there you don't find much. In our town not much has changed in the last 100 years concerning the lots...when you get back to the early deeds many read..."a lot on Cedar Street 100'x100'" and thats it. Not much help.
It's all situationally dependent. I just did a project where we had to trace the origin of a road. I ended up ready through hand written town board minuets from 1813-1860. In 1860 I found an official opening of the road to two rods wide, it should also be noted that every deed going back at least this far called the road to be 50 feet wide.
Tom
Thank you, a voice of reason.
Parcel Creation - you could start in Genesis.
I found a problem in the succession of the Spanish King in 1749 which has thrown all California Titles into question.
The good thing with having the 40 year title rule is that a Wild deed rules and I only have to go back 40 years. None of this retracement to patents and stuff 😉
> That's a tough question to answer with any kind of absolute. Typically the original is not all that hard to find. It's the mesne conveyances that are usually tough and many times contain need to know information.
That sounds more as if you are addressing questions of title rather than of boundary description. What am I overlooking in not worrying about title matters such as facts of heirship or liens?
This is a case where how you work is very much dependent on where you work.
Stephen,
I believe that it is not only prudent, but a mandate of our Professional Land Surveying Practices Act.
Below are excerpts from our General Rules of Procedures and Practices as followed by the T. B. P. L. S.
663.16.
Boundary Construction.
When delineating a boundary line as an integral portion of a survey, the land surveyor shall:
(1) Respect junior/senior rights for boundary retracement;
(2) Follow the footsteps of the original land surveyor;
663.19
(f) A reference shall be cited on the drawing and prepared description, if appropriate,
to the record instrument that defines the location of adjoining boundaries.
I interpret these rules to mean that we have to research deeds back to the separation of one tract into two (or more) tracts at which time a particular boundary line of the tract I am surveying was created. I also believe that particular deed must be listed on the plat.
If ever asked the question, "Which of these two tracts is senior to the other?", at least I will know the answer to that one.
"What am I missing?" About 10 acres on one recent project. Descriptions had been changed in conveyances from default on mortgage. Two surveys performed, both with disclaimers about the boundary over the past 80 years. One title report missing crucial intervening conveyances. One abstract missing the same. No question about where the "original" boundary was. The question was where is it now. I know some would like to completely seperate title from boundary, but I've never figured out how to do that. I do my best to show a boundary that represents the limits of written title as I think a court would likely rule given my testimony and all the evidence. The quality or distribution of the title within those limits are for others to speculate on, although I'll give an opinion on that as well in court if it is something I have knowledge about.
The statutory requirement here is to research the subject and abutting tracts to "ensure the correctness of the record evidence". This correctly leaves the call up to the surveyor as to how far back to go. When I am dealing with a tract that is not part of a "modern" subdivision, I always take it back as far as I can. Frequently it can be found that you have a relatively garbage description (bounded on the west by smith, on the north by said highway, on the east by jones, and on the south by other land of the grantee) for 150+ years of conveyances and then get back to the first few grants in a town chartered in the late 1700's, for example, and get a beautiful description with bearings, distances, and calls for fences as they run etc.
I don't know how it is in most part of the country, but here I can chase deeds back from the comfort of my office to the late 1700's in some of the counties without any issue. There is no excuse not to check the record if it is available.
> "What am I missing?" About 10 acres on one recent project. Descriptions had been changed in conveyances from default on mortgage.
Ah, the situation of a foreclosure on a mortgage is a good exception to the rule, although if some title insurer insured the title to Lot X according to the plat of the subdivision and you examined the tax assessor's records, surveyed Lot X according to the plat of the subdivision, and reported all facts on the ground that disclosed the identities of other parties in possession of parts of Lot X than the supposed record owners, it sounds like a title insurer problem.
It's true that there are matters such as judgments in lawsuits and foreclosures that may not be properly reflected in subsequent conveyances which nonetheless affect the boundaries of a tract of land. Searching the District Court records in my county is even more difficult than searching the Real Property Records. I'm willing to leave the title insurer on the hook for that unless I see a reference to the suit.
The surveyor is obliged to examine all relevant evidence. One may after examination of ALL the relevant evidence form an opinion that the boundary has been settled as a matter of repose.
I think it is doubtful that any evidence related to the King of Spain in the 1700's is relevant to any question of boundary in California,today. I understand Dave jests.