An effective guide for boundary surveyors already exists. It is called; "A Practical Guide to Disputes Between Adjoining Landowners - Easements", a compilation by Backman & Thomas, published by Matthew Bender Div. of LexisNexis. It is updated annualy and contains extensive case law references including a chapter on alternate dispute resolution procedures.
Once you understand how to determine the location of the legal boundary, you realize that surveyor have no obligation to preserve record descriptions and, we have no obligation to follow in the footsteps of the original surveyor unless the owners have preserved the original property line.
With the knowledge of the rights of the land owner here in the US, surveyors will understand that our legal system is not the place to deal with errors in land records.
Remember, our legal system is designed to resolve disputes; that is, we have an adverserial system. Any anomoly in the records must be treated by a lawyer as a dispute that must be resolved.
The problem with that is that the established legal physical boundary is proof that a 'dispute' has been resolved by the owners who have the right to establish their own boundaries.
Once boundaries are in place, no dispute exists and a simple correction to the record is all that is necessary to prevent litigation.
Surveyors can provide the record correction process in an agency relationship with the land owner and any necessary correction must be in place at the time of a land sale to prevent the seller from perpetrating a constructive fraud by selling something he does not own.
Surveyors who are retained by the title insurer/lender/buyer cannot correct the record but, when we do not inform the client(s) that the record is inaccurate, we facilitate a fraudulent land transfer and then we bear the brunt of the liability for any damages that may result. Remember, the only thing necessary to comply with the statute of frauds is that the record description does comply with the accuracy requirements at the time of the sale.
The solution is for the surveyor and seller provide a survey confirming the accuracy of the description as one of the documents in the acceptance of an offer to purchase. This would happen well before loan application and closing dates, which gives the surveyor/seller team ample time to detect and correct errors in the land records. This also eliminates interference from lawyers because there is no dispute to be resolved, only inaccuracies in the record to be corrected.
Deed staking is not the land surveyors professional work product.
Richard Schaut
That would make a great YouTube, Richard. Is there a chance you could have someone make a video of you doing this stuff?
I just have one thing to ask, Which one of you are the Palestinians?
You didn't get much from other areas after you turned tail and ran from the old rpls board did you? Then why should I bother, I'm not running from anything.
It wouldn't help you anyway, you don't know what an affidavit is or how it is used. That is evident from your recent affidavit posts.
best regards
Richard Schaut
> It wouldn't help you anyway, you don't know what an affidavit is or how it is used. That is evident from your recent affidavit posts.
LOL! I think what you meant is that I don't know how you used an affidavit.
🙂
That really is entirely understandable, however, for the reason that in the roughly fifteen years I've read your posts on three message boards, you've never actually posted any example of anything you've ever done! I had to go find those "corner" records you filed in 1985 that turned out to be available on line and now I think I know why you've hesitated to provide any actual examples of what you were up to.
mcmillan, your continued blatant ignorance is appalling.
Go to the new rpls.com board and read Mark Mayer's post from July 16 @ 12:15p in the SURVEY HEADACHE thread.
Remember, you posted the "Use it or Lose it" article by Atty Famborough and, when I explained what it meant, you attempted to pass it off a 'aggie trash'. If it was so trashy, why did you post it in the first place?
I still feel that your field uniform should consist of the fake sponge rubber nose, the extra large shoes that flap when you walk and you may carry your three-legged stool with the milk pail you use to store your gold plated vise grips.
not so best regards
Richard Schaut
> Remember, you posted the "Use it or Lose it" article by Atty Famborough and, when I explained what it meant, you attempted to pass it off a 'aggie trash'. If it was so trashy, why did you post it in the first place?
Richard, if you had googled "Texas adverse possession" when I did, years ago, that trashy article you mention would have come up. I took a cursory look at it when the Texas statutes on adverse possession were under discussion, but didn't read the article in detail. Had I done so, I wouldn't have posted it, as I've mentioned numerous (plus one) times now.
You'll recall, I'm sure, that recent Wisconsin court case dealing with a section line that was held not to run along a road. You may or may not recall that it revealed that your pet ideas are even contrary to Wisconsin statutes and Wisconsin case law. If you're looking for Texas law to apply in Wisconsin now, you're SOL, I'm afraid.
McMillan
Remember - Case law is not a reliable guide for land surveyors (unless you can pick and choose a case you know nothing about that you heard about in a magazine and can attempt to insult another surveyor with it).
McMillan
LOL! Gardner, know your state laws and remember that in the United States all lands are allodial! All land titles are also based on adverse possession, too! Mix these ingredients, taking care to shake but not stir.
The proper way to make a Surveytini...
5 parts case law
1 part measurements
with a dash of statute law
and stir, never shake if you want it to be crystal clear.
Attention...
Oops my recipe should read...
5 parts case law
1 part measurements
with a GARNISH of statute law
and stir, never shake if you want it to be crystal clear.
And this is critical...
If your shot glass shrank in the wash at least 5 years ago then you better just use it and not try to apply a new one.
Attention...
> 5 parts case law
> 1 part measurements
>
> with a GARNISH of statute law
Actually, Dave I've checked and the real recipe is:
5 parts address to the Michigan Bar (can be the same address repeated 5 times),
No measurements, because they can only nullify a property owner's rights to establish his or her boundaries,
and just pass the glass over a book of statutes of your state while at the same time proclaiming "this passes the test of the statutes of my state!"
> mcmillan, your continued blatant ignorance is appalling.
>
> I still feel that your field uniform should consist of the fake sponge rubber nose, the extra large shoes that flap when you walk and you may carry your three-legged stool with the milk pail you use to store your gold plated vise grips.
>
> not so best regards
> Richard Schaut
Seriously guys - Remember the late great Curtis M. Brown?
Professional Stature; Principle 8
"it is unprofessional to act in any manner or engage in any practice that will tend to bring discredit on the honor or dignity of the surveying profession."
Your tiff (surveying specific), for whatever reason, is online...its kind of permanent...not sayin', I'm just sayin'
I think this could progress beyond a tiff if one of the parties would engage in an actual dialogue rather than repeating the thoughts of others that never really address the subject at hand. Otherwise, it's just one of those diversions left over from the old RPLS board that is a PIA or a LOL depending on your mood.
Not one of the above posts deal in any way with the substance of the opening post.
Gardner, Lucas's article quoted a CA appelate court judge that said your surveyor was a bogus survey, go get the 'Slander of Title' article by Lucas from the POB archives and read it yourself.
Richard Schaut
I have been on many a survey where the adjoiners said they thought the fence was the line, or that the fence had been used as the line, and they seem to be happy with the fence as the line. That is until you find that the deeded line is monumented on the other side of the fence, then all of a sudden the fence isn't good enough anymore, and you hear cries of "I just want what is mine" or "I want what my deed says I own".
I can't think of a single time in 21 years where someone who discovered that the deeded line was on the other side of the fence told us to ignore the deeded line and use the fence.
It's not often
Than I can find reason to agree with Mr. schaut, but in this case I am having a difficult time finding fault with his original posting.
I think that he makes a strong case for communication with the client and neighbors, of bring any potential "conflict" out into the open for an easier resolution.
I cannot advocate this in solution in every instance, especially since here in MA we have a 20 adreverse possession statue, but jeez guys, the numbers (math) is just supposed to be helpful in finding the monuments, and when those monuments don't exist in the field then we have to look for other compelling reasons to make a boundary decision. There in lies the "Art" of surveying.
Sometimes I will apportion the errors, (I am not in a PLSS state so this may mean something different to me than PLSS surveoyrs) I will exmine uncalled for monuments, I will examine the use lines, and then where the record would fall and the potential conflicts that may arise.
Since I do work in a State where there are a multitude of available record plans, monuments in the ground, and 100's of years of recorded history at the Registries I feel more lucky than the brothers in the "newer" states....
What did Mr. Schaut say that has y'all riled up? Or is it more simply that "He" said it?
Don
It's not often
> What did Mr. Schaut say that has y'all riled up? Or is it more simply that "He" said it?
For the record, I am not riled up, just haven't seen many cases where neighbors determined their own boundaries, and then stuck to those boundaries when it looked like they could claim more land.
D.J.
yeah, you didn't sound all that riled up, but a few of the others seem to be arguing to argue without really commenting on the original post...
Donald
> ...a few of the others seem to be arguing to argue without really commenting on the original post...
Makes me feel right at home! LOL!
