> In 1988 the legislature enacted chapter 817, which added subsection (i) to 8726. However, 817 included a note under section 5: "The amendment in Section 1 of this act is declaratory of existing law and is not intended to restrict the practice of persons licensed to practice law in California, nor is it intended to be applicable to persons licensed pursuant to Part 6 (commencing with Section 12340) of Division 2 of the Insurance Code, nor to persons licensed pursuant to Part 1 (commencing with Section 10000) of division 4 of the Business and Professions Code, so long as those persons engage in the respective practice of their profession, but who may coordinate work pursuant to subdivision (k) of Section 8726 of the Business and Professions Code.
I interpret this to allow Title Officers, Attorneys, etc. to make use of legal descriptions by attaching them to documents within their purview, not to creating or modifying descriptions.
Well, then does writing legal descriptions fall within the definition of surveying in Co? if so then the board has some authority. Is illegal practice a crime? if the board has no authority to regulate its profession then the Attorney General office usually does. When it comes down to it, the point I am making is that nothing we say on the internet matters unless there is action on the part of the board or AG office..and that action only comes when surveyors take action. Sounds like Ric is in the position to get a cease and desist letter from his board or the AG's office. That might stop the practice.
> Curious if any of you have ever experienced a title officer rewriting a legal description prepared for a property line adjustment, removing most of the preamble, and characterizing their actions as:
>
> "...the extra verbiage in the preamble is fluff and redundant, the legal only need include the basic information (lot/tract, courses & distances, etc.) The recital that the land was once described in a prior deed is insignificant. Basically, we clean up the legal description and remove information that is unnecessary, insignificant, or redundant information."
>
> Yes, this was recorded for a subsequent sale. Any thoughts on this?
My first question would be whether the action impairs the description. I'd understand the recitals you provided in the preamble as helping some future reader understand various facts related to the adjustment instead of making them go hunt for those records themselves, which is professional and commendable in a way that the title company employee's redactions were really not. What exactly does it cost to record a printed page in the public records? Much less than a hundred dollars, as I would suppose?
Around here anyone can write legal descriptions and those that do are not under the jurisdiction of the Board of Engineers and Land Surveyors. In the past 10 years I have seen the practice of lawyers and title officers composing or re-writing legal descriptions drop off significantly.
In your case I would definitely respond to the title officer and his manager about the pitfalls and liability of his/her actions. That usually gets their attention. If they don't respond or don't care don't work with them again. Find the good ones and use them. Having a good working relationship and understanding with a title officer is very useful.