AI Assistant
Notifications
Clear all

Un-recorded R/W agreement with DOT and US Army

14 Posts
5 Users
0 Reactions
262 Views
djames
(@djames)
Posts: 850
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

I been searching for a R/W deed for a couple days now , between the DOT and US Army . Site was a Missile plant during WWII . During the sixties DOT widen R/W to 100' but my deed goes 19 feet out in road, I also found the DOT monuments as called for the 100', shown on the R/W plans . Found the R/W deeds for adjoiners but not the subject, so I called DOT R/W and asked them to look for the deed . After much nashing of the teeth , a young R/W agent (the old one told me to pound sand ) tells me he found a unrecorded agreement signed by USA Army Realestate office giving the R/W to DOT , but apparently it was not recorded . DOT says there claiming the R/W .

Is it valid ? I would think so , since they each are governmental bodies and agreements signed would be binding even if its not found in the court house ..

I thought about photo copying it and making a second page for references on the map .

What you think ?


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 1:03 pm
WA-ID Surveyor
(@wa-id-surveyor)
Posts: 982
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Recording of the document is not necessary to made the document valid if it's between private parties. I am not sure how those rules work with Government agencies?


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 1:09 pm
Larry P
(@larry-p)
Posts: 1121
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

> Is it valid ? I would think so , since they each are governmental bodies and agreements signed would be binding even if its not found in the court house ..
>

Is it valid? Probably.

But you well know that we in NC are one of the "race" states. If you finish your work without showing the right of way and the property is transferred without the right of way as an exception, I think DOT has some problems.

Of course, this is exactly the sort of case where if it ever got before a Judge they would very likely ignore the law and rule for what best protects "the public".

Larry P


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 1:17 pm
Brian Allen
(@brian-allen)
Posts: 1570
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

> ... a young R/W agent (the old one told me to pound sand ) tells me he found a unrecorded agreement signed by USA Army Realestate office giving the R/W to DOT , but apparently it was not recorded . DOT says there claiming the R/W .
>

The obvious question is ... why doesn't the DOT fix the problem now?

Is the adjoiner (Army, I assume) wanting or trying to claim the planned, monumented, documented, and I presume occupied R/W?

I'd probably show the R/W as monumented and shown on the plans, and note it with the found information. I would not record a copy of the "agreement" with my survey.


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 1:56 pm
djames
(@djames)
Posts: 850
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

In NC 80 % of the surveys maps , are not recorded , So this survey will go out to Client , Attorney (for closing) and Engineer .

Army property is subject property but was sold in 90's to private individual .


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 2:13 pm

Larry P
(@larry-p)
Posts: 1121
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

> Army property is subject property but was sold in 90's to private individual .

Did the conveyance from the Army to the private individual mention the right of way? If not, DOT has a problem. But then, they seldom care about problems. They always figure they are the state and they can do anything they want.

Larry P


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 2:38 pm
Brian Allen
(@brian-allen)
Posts: 1570
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

> In NC 80 % of the surveys maps , are not recorded , So this survey will go out to Client , Attorney (for closing) and Engineer .
>
> Army property is subject property but was sold in 90's to private individual .

I would have no problem providing a copy of the agreement to the client and the attorney, in fact I recommend it. But the engineer?? He probably wouldn't know what to do with it except blow his nose on it. 😉


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 2:59 pm
paul-in-pa
(@paul-in-pa)
Posts: 6034
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

If The DOT Wants 100' They Can Condemn It...

...then show the unrecorded document and set compensation at $1.

Then a very angry buyer would come looking for the surveyor.

Paul in PA


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 4:07 pm
djames
(@djames)
Posts: 850
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

If The DOT Wants 100' They Can Condemn It...

Explain comment .i don't follow.


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 5:15 pm
djames
(@djames)
Posts: 850
Member
Topic starter
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

Deed does not say subject to road R/w . The doc is actually a formal US Army document. And is called a road easement . so I changing my mind NCDOT only has use as an easement ..
At the end of day developer will have to dedicate right of way to get site plan approved .


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 5:25 pm

Larry P
(@larry-p)
Posts: 1121
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

If The DOT Wants 100' They Can Condemn It...

> ...then show the unrecorded document and set compensation at $1.
>
> Then a very angry buyer would come looking for the surveyor.
>
> Paul in PA

Like Djames I too am confused.

When you survey do you let how angry the neighbor might get or how much influence they may have change your findings?

When consulting with my clients I certainly make them aware of things like this and I am sure to put my recommendations in the eventual report. But the fact the neighbor might not like the results has no impact on the evidence considered or the conclusions reached.

Larry P


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 5:44 pm
paul-in-pa
(@paul-in-pa)
Posts: 6034
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

If The DOT Wants 100' They Can Condemn It...

If you are aware of a 100' easement or right of way and do not show it, you are pretty much on the hook when that easement or right of way is enforced.

Condemnation is more familiar to the government than other forms of acquisition so I suggest it is one method they might use to acquire/reacquire or enforce that right. However at the time of discussing compensation for the taking by showing the original document the amount of consideration becomes moot.

Paul in PA


 
Posted : April 16, 2014 8:30 pm
Larry P
(@larry-p)
Posts: 1121
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

If The DOT Wants 100' They Can Condemn It...

> If you are aware of a 100' easement or right of way and do not show it, you are pretty much on the hook when that easement or right of way is enforced.
>

The entire point is the easement does not exist. We are a race state and NC DOT had years and years of opportunity to perfect their claim to the easement. By not recording it, they left themselves open to another party receiving the land absent the easement.

At best DOT could go back to the party from whom the acquired the easement and demand repayment of funds. The original Grantor of the easement should have made the subsequent purchaser of the property aware of the unrecorded easement and should have made the property subject to the unrecorded easement. But ultimately this is not the fault of the current owner of the property.

Larry P


 
Posted : April 17, 2014 7:36 am
paul-in-pa
(@paul-in-pa)
Posts: 6034
Member
Translate
English
Spanish
French
German
Italian
Portuguese
Russian
Chinese
Japanese
Korean
Arabic
Hindi
Dutch
Polish
Turkish
Vietnamese
Thai
Swedish
Danish
Finnish
Norwegian
Czech
Hungarian
Romanian
Greek
Hebrew
Indonesian
Malay
Ukrainian
Bulgarian
Croatian
Slovak
Slovenian
Serbian
Lithuanian
Latvian
Estonian
 

If A Road Was Built an Easemnt Exists

That the road is there is sufficient notice.

Race States still do not require filing for rights to pass. I would say that the easement exist and the burden of an easement passes to the subsequent buyer whether filed or not.

I also believe that sufficient time has passed for the easement to ripen even if there never was a document.

Race State may be in effect for a private easements, but in this case you are going against the Sovereign. Therefore possession of fee does not ripen in to possession free of public easements absent abandonment.

Paul in PA


 
Posted : April 17, 2014 4:56 pm