A while back, I posted about the guy who approached while I was surveying and told me of the acreage he was "cheated" out of by the surveyor who divided his property off. After slogging through the older deeds to confirm that the more modern surveys for both his and his neighbors property did not have any apparent issues, I was able to show him that everything both historically and currently matched. There were exceptions missing from deeds and missing sources of title, but in the end it all fit together.
Shortly after that incident, a client asked me to survey 75 acres he has had since the mid 80s. He brought in several deeds to help me get started. One page had a note indicating "disputed". Seeing that note, I explained I would look into it and charge for my time doing so and then we could determine if a field survey was needed. As I worked on the paper trail, I found out the location is already well defined by another surveyor (relatively recently). The issue seems to be the way some old deeds from 1907 are worded. One deed in particular has a metes and bounds description that clearly indicates being a portion of the property, but the record source states being the same property as the parent deed. Another deed from three months later has a bounds description and also cites being the same property as the parent deed. Current occupation and use (since the 1980s) contradicts the idea of being the same property and would support the metes and bounds within the deed. After a solid eight hours in the courthouse, this one seems more of a legal issue than a field survey issue. Meeting with client early next week to discuss options.
A week after the 75 acre request, I ended up with a long time client buying a Master Commissioner's deed which (1) referenced a Property Valuation Administration parcel ID and (2) had a metes and bounds description and (3) referenced a source of title. The description and source of title only includes 1/3 of what the PVA parcel number includes because a defunct land development company from the 60s and 70s had acquired the property in several different deeds. I have finally found all of the last recorded deeds which comprised the whole of the property. They had three 1/4 sections in the Jackson Purchase area of Kentucky and then developed it by several subdivision plats and some metes and bounds descriptions. Tracing forward, there are bits and pieces of land scattered about two of the 1/4 sections.
While the puzzle solving of a messy set of deeds is fun and rewarding, these ones always seem to come in batches. I'm looking forward to one with a simple straight forward chain of title that matches occupation and corners can be found!
with a simple straight forward chain of title that matches occupation and corners can be found!
I seem to remember doing a survey like that once a long time ago.
I seem to remember doing a survey like that once a long time ago.
Tom, From the pics you sent, I'm guessing you are just imagining that you ever had a simple one to do! Looked like you and Nick had fun playing in the snow.
I got so excited last week when I found two trees in mile long stretch of "nobody has any idea where the lines are" that had old barbed wire coming out of the middle. Literally no surveyor had ever been involved in creating a description for this property ever and the farmers that did write them have been dead for a couple of generations. I would have danced a jig if the hill wasn't so steep that I would have fallen and rolled a very long way to the bottom. One of my favorite buttons on my beloved Javad unit is distance to last. On that hill, the distance to my last shot was 1,100 feet horizontal and 540' vertical
I've had that feeling after finding old fence in the middle of a large tree. It's part of what makes surveying fun.
Fill in the blank.
If, Excited = finding old fence in the middle of a large tree
________ = having to tell your client the property line is 5' on his side of that fence.
