State of Tennessee

Odd that I have met the Senator who introduced that legislation. My wife once worked for him in a Home Health agency that he used to own.

I take it this is proposed legislation? Would it only apply if title insurance is being issued? I am certain there are at least a few transactions that still occur where there is no lender and no title insurance or commitment.

Sounds Like The Surveyor Can Be Responsible For More

than the title package encompasses without ever doing a survey.

Tennessee surveyors best get on the ball before some single office surveyor somewhere can sign off on every title package.

How does a surveyor read a title package and know what the use is?

Paul in PA

The above (does/does not) simply lay more liability on the surveyor? I suppose the lawyers will want you to do it for nearly free.

What Is A “Plane Coordinate” Description?

POB = 5,000' N 5,000' E should suffice.

Paul in PA

I'll look at this a little closer, but so far all I can say is "Are you shii.. kidding me?"

What surveyor in their right mind would sign that form without performing a complete field survey of the subject property and potentially all called for adjoiners?

The same one who would do a "mortgage survey" with a 100' nylon tape 🙁

"This is to certify that I, ___________________________________, RLS# _____ a representative of _________________ _____________________________________have examined the property description contained in:
.....

and found said description to: "

My thought is that you are not certifying a description, you are simply stating whether or not it appears to be adequate. Maybe not as much liability as I first thought.

Surveyors - As introduced, requires licensed land surveyors to verify in a written report the quality of a property description in certain transfer documents prior to the transfer of title to any interest in real property in the state. - Amends TCA Title 8; Title 35; Title 47, Chapter 10; Title 62, Chapter 18 and Title 66.

How are you supposed to determine the “quality” of a property description without a complete investigation

Certification to: (Grantor) and (Grantee)

Here you are certifying to both the grantor and grantee, what about the mortgage holder(s)? Is there a reasonable expectation that this would also hold against all future grantees, and holders of interest in such property?

This is to certify that I, ___________________________________, RLS# _____ a representative of _________________ _____________________________________have examined the property description contained in:

and found said description to:

1) Contain a “Lot and Block” description, which adequately defines the subject property, and is supported by a “Plat of Record”, which (does/does not) maintain all necessary information to reasonably reproduce said perimeter boundaries on the ground, given the associated monumentation exists within the vicinity of the subject property.

How can you possibly certify that a plat “maintains “all” necessary information to reasonably reproduce said perimeter boundaries on the ground, given the associated monumentation exists within the vicinity of the subject” without actually going on the ground and verifying those conditions actually do exist?

2) Contain a “Metes and Bounds” description, which (does/does not) adequately define the subject property, and (does/does not) maintain a reasonable closure, given the use and size of the subject property. Said Metes and Bounds description (does/does not) appear to represent that the subject property boundaries can reasonably be reproduced in the field given sufficient monumentaton exists as represented within said description.

Are you really going to certify to the “use and size” without further investigation and actually surveying the property? How can you certify that the “boundaries can reasonably be reproduced in the field given sufficient monumentaton exists as represented within said description” without surveying the property?

3) Contain an “Adjoiners/Abutters” description, which given the quality of the adjoining/abutting descriptions (does/does not) appear to represent that the property boundaries can reasonably be reproduced in the field given sufficient monumentation exists as represented within said adjoining/abutting descriptions.

Again, how can you ethically sign this without full knowledge of the conditions to which you are certifying? It appears that you would also be certifying not only the subject property, but all adjoiners called for.

4) Contain a “Plane Coordinate” description, which (does/does not) appear to represent that the subject property boundaries can reasonably be reproduced in the field given sufficient monumentaton exists as represented within said Plane Coordinate Description.

Huh? What do they mean by “sufficient monumentaton exists as represented within said Plane Coordinate Description”?

5) Contain a “Physical Feature” description, which (does/does not) appear to represent that the subject property boundaries can reasonably be reproduced in the field given sufficient monumentaton exists as represented within said Physical Feature Description.

How can you possibly certify to this without verifying the existence (or absence) of the “physical features” called for?

Looking at the actual language in the bill (per the link):

(2) The land surveyor shall attest, as evidenced by the land surveyor’s professional seal and personal signature, in a written report to the quality of the property description, including the mathematical closure of the description. The land surveyor shall also attest to whether, in the land surveyor’s professional opinion, the description may be retraced on the ground by a general property survey.

How can you certify to this, given the Tennessee courts are still recognizing, where appropriate, extrinsic evidence?

(b) The land surveyor shall determine whether the real property description contained in any examined item listed in subsection (a), adequately describes or contains appropriate information necessary to locate, relocate, or define the real property, after reviewing the applicable documentation that represents, depicts, displays, or describes the real property.

Not a chance without a complete and accurate field survey.

(c) The liability of a land surveyor acting under this section is limited to the cost of services provided to verify the property description.

Really? I guess you could only charge $5 for each certification, but who is going to pay your attorney fees when you have to defend your certification when the land owners drag you into their boundary dispute?
If the surveyor truly has no liability, why do they need a licensed professional to make an essentially worthless certification?

(d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to require a land surveyor to perform a survey or other procedure or practice in acting in accordance with this section.

Well, I guess nothing other than your professional ethics and responsibilities.

(e) Nothing in this section shall be construed to require a land surveyor to research the title or encumbrances on the property involved in any real property transfer.

Yea right. [sarcasm]I guess if they changed all the references from “property” to “land”, according to Kent, you wouldn’t need to.
[/sarcasm]

It would appear that someone in Tennessee is tired of all the litigation and uncertainty of the location of property boundaries, and are looking for a cheap solution and someone else (surveyors) to take all the liability of such uncertainties. I would hope the surveyor’s society is all over this, testifying and lobbying to kill this atrocity.

In Texas our BOR expects each surveyor to be responsible for their own surveys and the Signature of the surveyor holds the weight that everything covered in the the Standards of Practice were accomplished.

I would sign that document only after I had surveyed the property.

B-)

In Trinidad, ...

1793: "... and each Surveyor shall affix his signature on the map in order to prosecute, if necessary."

This TAPS newsletter should explain more on this.

TAPS Newsletter

My, oh, my, oh, my

I am nearly speechless. This will most definitely be killed by every vested interest in getting deeds filed and the property transferred as painlessly as possible. Their primary goal is to ensure that money changes hands and a portion of that money ends up in their pockets as soon as possible.

This will probably end up making any ethical surveyor reviewing deed descriptions appear to be a criminal simply out to force people into paying him or his cronies for a survey. The alternative being that the unscrupulous surveyor who signs off on everything automatically simply to collect his review fee will be a hero.

My, oh, my, oh, my

I will reserve my opinion since I am not a licensed in that State.

But I kinda get a weird feeling when I read this in the TAPS Newsletter:

"..Individuals who make a $100 donation will be a member of the
Land Surveyor’s PAC. They will have voting rights in the selection
of the PAC Trustees and given an opportunity to deliver PAC
donation requests to state leaders in their area. This is a great way
to meet your representatives and other state leaders. But most
importantly, you will see how these contributions and the legislative
process can assist and protect the land surveyor..."

Let's BUY some voting rights.

Man, politics scare me...

This is quite interesting, but mostly frightening. Who knows, maybe I'm too cynical?

Tennessee seems to be attempting to create something akin to the infamous "mortgage survey", only much worse. The land owner now has a document signed and certified by a professional land surveyor saying his description (he reads boundaries) are adequate.

Imagine yourself certifying that a metes and bounds description, does adequately define the subject property, and does maintain a reasonable closure, given the use and size of the subject property. Said Metes and Bounds description does appear to represent that the subject property boundaries can reasonably be reproduced in the field given sufficient monumentation exists as represented within said description."

The landowner (Smith) walks away from the closing reassured that a professional land surveyor has just certified that his newly acquired property boundaries and description contain no problems - $100 well spent huh?

Well, two years later, his neighbor (Jones) has his property actually surveyed and surprise, surprise, surprise, the fence line between them is "off" by two feet, the lawyers phones start ringing. Do you really think the part of the statute that says you are not liable will protect you from being drug into court and having to hire an attorney to prove you are not liable? What if Jones' surveyor finds latent ambiguities in Smith's description which you had no way of knowing about (remember the definition of a latent ambiguity?) since you only "reviewed" Smith's description?

What if you certify a description is not adequate and "big dollar buyer" backs out of purchasing a million dollar commercial parcel. The "big dollar seller" then hires another surveyor to actually survey the property because you said the description was inadequate. Yep, you guessed it, your competitor down the road finds no major problems with the description, it is completely adequate. "Big dollar seller" now sues you because your "negligence" killed his sale. Do you really want to open that can of worms?

Yep, it sounds great to dip our hands into the lucrative pot of every real estate transaction "for the good of the public", but is it really going to be worth it to provide another worthless piece of paper in the stack of closing documents? Is this really benefiting the public and the profession? What value is the buyer actually getting, a piece of paper that basically assures him of nothing?

If TAPS is really concerned about protecting the public from "inadequate descriptions", why not go the all the way and require a survey before every sale, or at least require every new description be written by a surveyor? That comes a lot closer to actually protecting the public by providing a service that at least approaches being worth the paper it is written upon. But then again, that would require many more lobbying $$$$$ be raised and spent.

If you end up keeping this train wreck, at least consider removing the part of the statute that supposedly removes the liability from the surveyor. At least then the unscrupulous surveyors that will be signing these "certifications" by the scores/week could more easily be held accountable.

If passed, the bill would require all individuals to hire a land surveyor to review the property description, before the transfer of any real property. They include title insurance policy and abstract of title, along with will and deed. Not a lawyer, but I believe the first two are not instruments that transfer property.

Anyway, this is not comparable to the rules that require a mortgage survey or Elevation Certificate for flood insurance. The public is required to buy those services when they choose to borrow money. Note that this even applies to wills.

It appears in Tennessee we have given up on the right to individual responsibility and due diligence?

It is interesting to see what the law says concerning what makes a description "adequate". I'm sure most everyone would agree that it can take more than just a "review" by a surveyor sitting at a desk with a computer.

It is "a broad general principle that a deed will not be declared void for uncertainty in description if it is possible by any reasonable rules of construction to ascertain from the description, aided by extrinsic evidence, what property is intended to be conveyed." 16 Am.Jur., Sec. 262, Deeds, page 585.

Yes, this was taken from a Tennessee Supreme Court Decision.
City of Johnson City v State ex rel. John Maden et al., 304 S.W.2d 317

This "idea" sounds like a huge can of worms, I'd leave the can-opener in the drawer.........

Wow. You guys are overreacting a little aren't you? Clearly the intent is to make sure that the description used is not total garbage (as in the wrong parcel, too vague to possibly retrace or resembles a sine wave when plotted). Nobody is asking for a boundary determination. If everyone is so afraid of being sued, how can you possibly give an opinion on boundary locations that you have surveyed? Do you charge $2 million for a 5 acre retracement? Because unless you've reached a level of perfection unheard of in any profession, you just might be wrong.

> Wow. You guys are overreacting a little aren't you?

It doesn't affect me directly, but, in my opinion, this is going to reduce my profession in the eyes of the public in general, so, yes I do care.

> Clearly the intent is to make sure that the description used is not total garbage (as in the wrong parcel, too vague to possibly retrace or resembles a sine wave when plotted).

Well, as they say "the road the he11 is paved with good intentions". I'd just suggest you look at all the probable pitfalls before becoming blinded by the seemingly easy pile of money to made from each transaction that occurs.

Also, just how are you going to certify that a description is "too vague to possibly retrace" with attempting to retrace it?

> Nobody is asking for a boundary determination.

True, but just what do think many uninformed buyers will assume their "bought and paid for certification" of their description by a "Professional Land Surveyor" is? What do you think will be the first piece of paper they will wave in the face of a neighbor who questions the location of the boundary line? Yep, your "certification".

> If everyone is so afraid of being sued, how can you possibly give an opinion on boundary locations that you have surveyed?

Because I actually have "surveyed" the property, not just "run a closure" and signed a certification.

> Do you charge $2 million for a 5 acre retracement? Because unless you've reached a level of perfection unheard of in any profession, you just might be wrong.

Any survey I perform might not be perfect, and my professional opinion can be challenged, but at least I can proudly say I performed the survey within the standards of practice, relevant law, and the standard of care; what else am I supposed to do? I certainly am not going to declare a description "inadequate" or "adequate" without doing the same.

I was just pondering this issue and reading Brown's Evidence & Procedures, 3rd Ed., and run across Section 14-18:

"In many existing conveyances the area described is not mathematically and sometimes also not geometrically correct. This does not in itself invalidate a conveyance, since identity is all that is required. The question of the validity of a property description is a legal question, but the surveyor contributes his ability to interpret the description and whether it is capable of being located. If a surveyor can locate the land described and measure and determine its area, the conveyance is sufficient. Where there is a call for monuments (including record monuments) it is almost impossible to ensure mathematical and geometric closures without a new accurate survey. Unfortunately, mathematical and dimensional completeness of a description is not a legal necessity; it is merely a desirable feature of a good description."

There seem to be several things to research and ponder further, especially the highlighted part............

Enough of this - time to start to paying attention to my better half 😉 :love: