Ring Ring Attorney

With or without the certification to other "assigns" your liability is going to run with the plan and whomever relies on it.

I never could understand the reason for digging in on these requests. I was raised that our liability extends beyond the client. I usually just say, Ok.

Dtp

Then why are the attorneys so anxious about it? There is professional liability and then there is financial liability. Your financial liablity is generally limited to the person who paid for the survey. By certifying to others you extend that liability.

Interesting distinction.

I was taught that the liability runs with the survey and to whomever relies on the survey.

Now Professional Liability vs. Financial Liability, I assume that one is actionable by the Registration Board and the other in a court of law.

I guess that negligent practice, which is actionable in court, is different than substandard practice which the Board oversees.

Is that the distinction that you're making?

Dtp

> Is that the distinction that you're making?
Yes. You could be held financially liable for missing a vault or something on your survey. That might cause your client some financial loss, which you may be liable for. You would also be liable for any financial loss suffered by anyone else you certify to. If you certify to "assigns" that could be a very large number of people and their attorneys.

But missing a single vault probably wouldn't rise to the level of gross incompetence, which your licensing board would be interested in.

a Google search for "privity of contract cases with surveyors" will yield a wealth of references which may cause you to reconsider your theory. I will admit to arguing against the same clause, usually by convincing the attorney that I am liable to those successors and assigns without stating it.

Yeah, I agree with K. You can be sued for anything, but to be held liable there must be some breach. Unseen, buried stuff is usually exempt.

I have always felt that attempting to limit liability doesn't work, if pressed. Iy may give someone the cause to hesitate but if pursued will be defeated.

My 0.04' again

Dtp

I'm sure that clever attorneys can make all sorts of arguments and make them stick sometimes. For me, I think that it would be imprudent to certify to just anyone and everyone, where I can avoid it.

I think we beat this subject up pretty well three years ago. See http://beerleg.com/index.php?mode=thread&id=123137#p123333
and in particular Duane's comments.
Jim

[sarcasm]All my surveys have this statement: This survey subject to what an accurate survey would show.[/sarcasm]

I'm with you on that one. I just leave it off if it comes on a list of 'certifications'. If anyone asks, I tell them that my attorney and insurance provider have advised me against "ISAOA.. as they may appear" sort of language. I have NEVER had anyone complain after that.

I'm a liability vending machine...the more liability you want from me, the more quarters you have to put in.

Kind of a funny story about that:

When I was at one of my first gigs as a tech, I did the drafting and calcs on a typical lot survey. The firm I was at performed all kinds of surveying, and they had the best production line I've seen for spitting out lot surveys. Anywho, attorney calls wanting a big certification to all kinds of things and other people. I send him to the company owner. I'm with him in his office when the call goes down - he tells the attorney the only way he would sign such a cert is for a fee equal to the value of the lot. I hear him "OK" a few times then hangs up the phone, then starts cussing like a sailor and quite serious - then spits at me "NEVER LET ME DO THAT AGAIN!"

"Do what?"

"Tell an attorney I'll sign one of those certs for ANYTHING!"

"Oh"

"Now go put it on the survey and I'll sign it."

"Ok"

He did get the fee and that was the last I heard of it, and no, he never did that again to my knowledge.