...You have a typo in the certifications.. you seem to have left off "It's successors and or assigns" after the name of the bank.
(I always ignore that phrase when it comes across my desk, no one had ever mentioned it)
So I write to her.. "I am waiting to hear from my insurance carrier what the fee for the additional rider is to add that to the bank name. "
and she writes back.. "A lot of banks want the ISAOA because they sell the loans to others, who also want to be protected by the certification. Why don't you just eliminate that, if it is a problem.
"
me.."Yes, I understand why they want that added. I always leave it off. "
In 7 years of business, she is the first one to call to try to get ISAOA back on my map. I just leave it off.
I don't have a problem with it. They often transfer ownership to another party within the week, but don't know the name yet, so successors and assigns is commonly used.
I have zero problem with it either and can't see where it increases liability. What I'm certifying to is that the document itself and the survey are accurate to my best belief. The party/parties involved are meaningless to my survey and map as anyone may receive a copy.
I think it was said in an earlier discussion that the cert to successors and assigns does not increase your liability but does reduce the plaintiff's work in a lawsuit against you.
My attorney said that will absolutely open the door for any future entity to claim damage in case I missed anything. How could that not be of value? The fact that no one till now has even mentioned my deleting it tells me that I am right to not give that away. Also, its not like they gave me the certs up front for discussion.
In my mind, I feel that we sell information. We train, educate and test ourselves on the ability to collect it and portray it on paper. I value my skills too much to just give that away, but maybe it's just me.
You are not alone.
I feel that after the closing, that product has served purpose until it expires for that client.
Next client should pay their due fee to extend my involvement on that product for them.
There are some offices that require that the paperwork to be in their name before it is accepted.
When someone wants for their name to appear on my product as a client, there is a fee for that service.
Bottom line is that clients are paying customers.
0.02
We are responsible for what we do. We must do the best work possible or suffer the consequences. Some States may have created time limits to try to help provide a cutoff for certain types of liability, but, not all. My opinion is that we should not be allowed to run around willynilly doing crappy work with a goal of having our sorry butts covered by some insurance plan or statute of limitations. Some firms, especially the bigger ones seem to view their risk in light of such options. I cannot lower my standards to such a level.
Andy:
Obviously everybody else surveys better than you or
are more righteous than you.
Yes, I think some people are missing the point. It's got nothing to do with the quality of my work. And since I do every single bit of it myself, I know how much goes into it. MAYBE , that's part of the reason I might value my product so highly. I'm not debating anyone else's take on ISAOA , but wanted to say that we should not be afraid to stand up for what we believe. There are plenty of sharks that will leave you alone if you swat them in the nose when they swim by.
A surveyor down the road in KY got sued by his client. There wasn't enough
flagging on the pipe which she stepped on. It wasn't his pipe, he tied
ribbon on it.
He spent $20k on attorney fees before settling for $500 to his client.
I like your approach Andy, and I never add ISOA or other language without an added charge, If every surveyor took your approach the phrase would immediately disappear.
I agree. It's quite difficult to certify to an unknown entity.
