Storm Pipes Under House

I think that there was enough evidence to raise flags, has the standards of care in that area been met. Does your survey have the head wall and storm inlet shown along with your rough directions? I worked for a firm that missed a water line across a lot they had created in a new subdivision, no record and no surface evidence. The firm bought the lot, the pipe was discovered while excavating for footings.
jud

Jud,
no evidence recovered during initial survey. Headwall was buried under growth and dirt. If it were visible it would have been located. The curb inlets I mentioned above are located on the frontage of another property. The survey performed was not a topographic survey. Nor was any attempt made to locate underground utilities as specified in notes of survey.

Today once notified of the possible situation we returned located neighboring structures, and structure on our property as well as pipe directions.

One of our standard contingencies is that the property owner will mark out any utility not marked by Dig Safe.

I understand what you are saying and agree with it. With that said, there are times when the owner has no idea of utility locations. We used to perform a lot of smoke testing, looking for leaks. We have found storm and sanitary lines under houses that have been in place for 50 years. NOONE knew of the existence of the lines. I even found a manhole in the crawlspace of a house that was over 60 years old. Surprised the heck out of the old lady who had lived there 40 years. Sometimes stuff just up and bites you, even with all due caution and research.

Andy

Try as we might, we have never been able to get our total station to shoot underground.

You can only do so much. No easement found and the head wall was buried. You are not psychic.
I always include the note, "no underground exploration performed in this survey."

I don't see how you could be held liable, especially if no above ground evidence existed. As always, the contrary may be shown, though.

I have a standard note on all my surveys as to the possible existence of underground utilities. After reading this, I may have to modify that just slightly.

Please keep us posted. This could be a learning experience for all of us.

A former employer of mine once had a similar situation. A house on a small residential lot had a pipe underneath it and it wasn't noticed by the field crew. I don't know all of the details, but it wasn't favorable to my boss. I would recommend that you prepare to defend yourself.

Who says a pipe can't run under the house. Not our job to find all under ground structures . Also sounds like its speculation the pipe is under the house need to camera the line at the owners expense . I would not except any wrong doing but turn it around and tell him you can help with the discovery of the issue and recommend any future actions. Also probably met Code when house was built .

We just had one: A 15 year old house was just torn down to make way for a squash court. The same contractor who helped put up the house is tearing it down. He made sure to tell me where the water was, but he forgot all about the electric conduit the he for some reason laid between the house and the septic tank. Dig Safe was useless as they barely flagged in the road. They were sent out there multiple times and the problem: the tracer was broken, likely caused by the contractor when he installed it.

It happens, but the costs associated with a wild goose chase for the rare and possibly random utility will be more than the survey.

NOTE: UNDERGROUND IMPROVEMENTS AND INSTALLATIONS HAVE NOT BEEN LOCATED.
UNLESS OTHERWISE SHOWN.

:snarky:

You are fine.

I mostly agree with Perry Williams and Low Country Surveyor. Finding and showing underground utilities was outside the scope of your work. Extra-especially as there was little observable field evidence.

I would hope that your survey notes include verbiage as to what you're scope of work is and also something along the lines of excluding underground utilities, but regardless, it was still outside of your scope of work.

Of course, as we all know, having done no wrong does not necessarily keep one from getting hit by a lawsuit. Let's face it, you could get sued for wearing a purple tie with a green shirt.

So, stick to the fact that you had no obligation to survey underground utilities and don't capitulate.

Stephen

> Try as we might, we have never been able to get our total station to shoot underground.

Exactly.

> Who says a pipe can't run under the house. Not our job to find all under ground structures . Also sounds like its speculation the pipe is under the house need to camera the line at the owners expense . I would not except any wrong doing but turn it around and tell him you can help with the discovery of the issue and recommend any future actions. Also probably met Code when house was built .

I agree. We know it probably didn't happen, but maybe the original owner consented to the pipe running under his house for a price? You never know. More than likely the developer did it and by the time the homebuilder came along 30 years later, he had no idea.

What Stephen said. Remember, it's an "on-the-ground survey", not an "under-the-ground" survey. Is the real estate appraiser supposed to catch it too?

A note on all our title/boundary surveys states:

"Aerial and subsurface utilities are not shown."

As other have said, this is not normally what the Boundary Survey standard of carewould be.