Just think about how much time and money could have been SAVED if the original builder had hired a PLS.
[sarcasm]But they saved at least $250[/sarcasm]
Crooks and bullies. Hold fast and make them live with their stupidity.
Does it bug anyone else that none of the comments, or the article itself, suggest hiring a land surveyor to fix such issues in the future?
Sent from my LG-D321 using Tapatalk
Paul, post: 350135, member: 624 wrote: Does it bug anyone else that none of the comments, or the article itself, suggest hiring a land surveyor to fix such issues in the future?
Sent from my LG-D321 using Tapatalk
I'm not as bugged by it as I am surprised that no one blamed it on a surveyor.
By brother's first X started a house that was about 1/2 built when it was discovered that it was on a major water line easement. I don't know all the details but they walked away, it was never finished and it was later torn down.
Sometimes it doesn't matter if there is a surveyor.
Back in the 1970s, my dad was working on a small subdivision for the local sleazy idiot builder. We did an as-built survey on a house foundation and it didn't meet zoning setbacks.
Dad: "You'll have to ask the town for a variance."
Builder: "You have to fix this - YOU staked the house!"
Dad: "Yes I did, and there are the stakes still over there where the house was SUPPOSED to go!"
C Billingsley, post: 350137, member: 1965 wrote: I'm not as bugged by it as I am surprised that no one blamed it on a surveyor.
What bugged me was the array of Google questions required to view the article. My comment is "none of your damn business". BTW I bailed after the 4th question as they got more personal and found a way to read the article anyway as there was no opt out of the questions option.
Paul in PA
I was particularly impressed by the management of time and resources the group realized by using the same real estate agent for both buyer and seller.
A couple of years ago I did a survey for the City of Portland's water bureau. It seems someone had spent their nest egg building a nice house in the rural countryside. The problem was that they built it over a 100 foot wide water transmission line easement for the future installation of at least 1 6'+ line from the City's watershed into town. When the owner tried to sell his investment property they found the problem. His attorney asked how long it was going to take to remove the easement at which point the city asked how long it would take to remove the house. The City made a deal that if the owner, at his expense, could secure the changes needed to re-route the easement they would allow the house to stay. Sounds simple but the given the size of the pipe you just can't put a couple of bends around the house. It took about a 1/4 section to complete the shift and required negotiating with 5 neighbors that he had already pissed off. He did finally get it done but it took a year and quite a bit of money.
That's the golden rule. He who has the money makes the rules.