This thread is a great example of the variety of experiences surveyors have over time in the profession. ?ÿ License holders have a ticket assuring they are at least minimally qualified to perform a wide range of functions. ?ÿIt does not provide any assurance that a specific surveyor has a substantial quantity of experience with a specific type of project. ?ÿOver time each of us will find our preferred niche after obtaining experience in many areas. ?ÿSome of us generally avoid construction staking, for example, while others relish that type of work.
As for ALTA surveys, those of you in densely populated areas probably have the opportunity to pursue such projects very frequently. ?ÿThose of us in Boondocks, USA rarely get calls for such work as there are far fewer local commercial/industrial projects. ?ÿPart of that rarity comes about because the client has worked one or more times with a survey firm from a distant, but more densely populated region, and calls them without even considering a local source. ?ÿBased on a few decades of experience, I would strongly encourage those far from their office to allow some funds for consulting with the local yokels for assistance with the outer boundary and key knowledge obtained by working routinely with the local title companies and lenders. ?ÿIn my very limited role working for some local county governments I do provide assistance somewhat frequently to other firms working in the area for the first time. ?ÿAbout half appreciate and apply the local knowledge to their work. ?ÿThe other half are too busy being self-important to pay attention.
a wise man once said:
"If I were really concerned I'd ask to speak to whomever is requiring the ALTA. She's not. She's been tasked with getting it done.?ÿ"
maybe half the time the person ordering has any clue what the nitty gritty is they're asking for.?ÿ i always cut straight to finding out who needs it and why- usually find that the client really doesn't NEED that cert, and i can therefore save them some money!!!,?ÿand- if it is the scenario that aforesaid wiseman describes (which it frequently happens to be)- more often than not you end up with an incredibly grateful survey orderer who doesn't forget how helpful you were, whether he/she stays in that position or not.
imo, an ALTA cert is a waste of money in about 98% of the work i do, based upon both the size and scope of what i work on, as well as the standards by which i'm going to (and, to some extent, am bound to) already.?ÿ only for the biggest of the big ones (airports, campus-type scenarios, multiple-block urban, heavy civil-type) would i go out of my way to recommend an ALTA (even though 108% of the time that's already required on a gig like that).?ÿ otherwise i don't actively discourage people from paying the premium for that, but i do let them know exactly what the differences are between what i'm certifying to with it or without it.?ÿ usually doesn't amount to much unless they want aerials or SUE work done.?ÿ me simply stating that i'm insured usually satisfies anyone who might check that table A item.
My project focus is primarily on pre-design mapping.?ÿ For most commercial project the client request an ALTA for reasons other than insurance.?ÿ They like to know were encumbrances are before they start the design process.?ÿ This is true for projects ranging in size from a convenience store to a full scale shopping mall.
sure, and i've done a bazillion of those as well.?ÿ my point is that in this particular jurisdiction- texas- (speaking for myself only- though i do know quite a few dudes who would say the same basic thing) if i'm doing anything that involves the word "title" it's going to adhere to the minimum standards set forth for a category 1A land title survey as stipulated by the texas society of professional surveyors, which means it will meet or exceed every single "standard" table A item typically requested, at least in terms of diligence and accuracy.?ÿ any additional information contained on the survey is almost always entirely superfluous to the survey itself, and can always be found in some other report(s) or document(s) produced for the sake of the transaction.?ÿ so, in my personal experience, an ALTA is a waste of somebody's money almost every time.?ÿ it becomes more a means to recover your GL and E&O premiums than representing any real additional work performed.?ÿ and most knowledgeable clients are well aware of that fact.
but, ALTA or not, my good conscience is going to exceed those minimum standard requirements anyways.
I have no experience with Texas but if you're saying your "Category 1A Land Title Survey" meets or exceeds everything a standard ALTA Survey does then why would it save a Client money by contracting you to do a Cat 1A instead of an ALTA??ÿ Couldn't you?ÿinterchange the title of the Survey and the certification??ÿ It sounds like they're essentially the same deliverable aside from those two things...why would one cost more than the other if that's the case?
I prefer ALTA surveys over TSPS Category 1A surveys. Requirements are much more concise.
In cases like this, I would provide a high fee, fill out the Table A based on the information they?ÿprovide and include in the Proposal/Contract. I would state in the correspondence that this is my understanding of the scope and that the fee is based on this understanding. Many times when the person paying the bill would see this, I would get instructions that were more clear. I have filled out the Table A more times than the Client.