Aaaaargh. I've just spent 20 minutes on the phone with a lawyer, and a paralegal, and next I get to talk to another paralegal "who knows more about this sort of thing."
I wrote a legal description for a proposed sale of a ten-foot strip to the county, based upon an ALTA survey I performed. They can't match the ALTA survey curve information for the lot line to the legal for the line that is ten foot west of the lot line. Well of course they don't match. It is ten feet west of the lot line, so of course the radius would be ten feet longer, and the chord won't quite match either. They will never match - they aren't supposed to match. If they did match we would have a strip zero feet wide. I'm trying to persuade them to ignore all of the bearings, distances, and curve information and focus on the calls. You know, along the South line, along a line 10 feet West of and parallel with the East line, to the North line, etc. I'm sure they are just positive I'm trying to cover up a discrepancy.
The calls, the calls, Use the danged calls.
Aaaaargh.
You will never succeed, in getting them to quit focusing on the calls. Once they stick their nose in the calls, it's over. They care about those numbers. It is kind of like a green horn surveyor!
🙂
N
Some time back (a year or so) I got a call from a title company. Their contention was that my description didn't 'close'. With them on the phone, I opened my drawing up and went around it, call by call. It closes.
The west boundary of a the tract was RR R/W, on a curve. This fella on the phone tells me his 'software' was giving him an error at the last call (at the end of the curve).
I had to question him about his software. I had no idea, but they have some software that 'checks' desriptions (talk about dangerous...).
Anyway, after I had him swap the last curve call with a chord bearing and distance, his software 'closed'. I guess either his software, or input of the curve data, had a glitch.
Sometimes talking with those folks is kinda like trying to describe the shape of a Coca-Cola bottle to a blind person. It's gonna take some time.
Paden
I don't know but I would bet that he input the curve in the wrong direction. I had somewhat the same problem with a draftsman from an engineering company several years ago. Once I got him going in "the right direction" everything was fine. I even got a thank you from him for helping him out.
Andy
Paden
I thought that too. I can't really remember, but I think his software was 'rudimentary' enough that he had to go in a certain direction. I remember thinking I could give him the calls 'backwards', but we resolved it before I got to that point.
That's right up there when the quadrant of a bearing of the dimension on the map is the opposite of one of the legals (NE vs SW), when one line is common to 2 or 3 parcels being described. Those kind of people hate that. I've had to put both bearings on a map before to appease them.
I guess it's kind of understandable, but still frustrating. Plus it just clutters up the map.
It would be amusing to take one of those folk who understand nothing about the numbers they are trying to reconcile call and give the calls to a parcel in scrambled order. If it closed mathematically in the correct order, it will close in any order you take the individual calls. Of course it would not describe the same tract or acreage but it would close!
Sorry about the typo above. Just try to read over it...
