Paul in PA, post: 406667, member: 236 wrote: A boundary line agreement is not needed. Assume you provide a survey for your client, set corners and provide a copy to the other landowner. That landowner can accept the results without a signature or formal agreement. Should he choose to reject the results he would need his own survey and then a lawyer. I would suggest you record a copy of the survey along with language of the date it was presented to the adjacent landowner. It should be filed as a part of a deed from your client to your client with a revised description that references and includes the survey. You would want a very readable letter or legal size survey copy or survey original.
Paul in PA
By imposing your idea of a solution to their issue, you raise the potential for a costly dispute exponentially. If the other owner doesn't like it things will get expensive real quick.
Extract the agreement from the owners and reduce it to writing. Record in accordance with applicable law and be done. Don't forget to get paid.
That is the least expensive and most definitive solution. No Attorneys, no Courts, done.
"Extract the agreement from the owners and reduce it to writing. Record in accordance with applicable law and be done." That might be construed as practicing Law.
Plus Boundary Line Agreements very often require municipal board approval. The other owner may be in agreement but may not want to sign it because it may have consequences with a mortgage on the property, etc. If the surveyor sets the corners it may even be construed to be a subdivision. In that case the surveyor might set some stakes, then perambulate out there with the two landowners, hand them an iron pin or pipe, then note on the survey, "corner set by "A" & "B" by parol agreement as witnessed by "C" PLS, date".
There are many ways to "skin a cat".
Pul in PA
Paul in PA, post: 406681, member: 236 wrote: Boundary Line Agreements very often require municipal board approval. The other owner may be in agreement but may not want to sign it because it may have consequences with a mortgage on the property, etc. If the surveyor sets the corners it may even be construed to be a subdivision. In that case the surveyor might set some stakes, then perambulate out there with the two landowners, hand them an iron pin or pipe, then note on the survey, "corner set by "A" & "B" by parol agreement as witnessed by "C" PLS, date".
There are many ways to "skin a cat".
Pul in PA
I've had planners try to force an agreement into an approved adjustment or subdivision process before. Once educated they relented. Two big caveats.
First, our law provides a good foundation for agreements to resolve actual ambiguities. Not every State does. Second, I never use the process to subvert planning issues. I've only had one client try to get me to do that and I refused. The solution doesn't have to be one I like, but it has to be in the realm of possibilities...
Paul in PA, post: 406681, member: 236 wrote: "Extract the agreement from the owners and reduce it to writing. Record in accordance with applicable law and be done." That might be construed as practicing Law.
No, this isn't practicing law - it is (or should be) a standard tool that professional surveyors can and should use.
Paul in PA, post: 406681, member: 236 wrote: Plus Boundary Line Agreements very often require municipal board approval. The other owner may be in agreement but may not want to sign it because it may have consequences with a mortgage on the property, etc. If the surveyor sets the corners it may even be construed to be a subdivision. In that case the surveyor might set some stakes, then perambulate out there with the two landowners, hand them an iron pin or pipe, then note on the survey, "corner set by "A" & "B" by parol agreement as witnessed by "C" PLS, date".
By definition, a boundary agreement doesn't "move" an existing line, nor does it create any "new line" or "subdivision" of land, and therefore they shouldn't be any concern of any knowledgeable gov't regulatory agency. A boundary line adjustment may trigger such concerns, but a boundary agreement doesn't because it is only the clarification of the location of an existing boundary.
Far too often we tend to throw up road blocks that simply aren't relevant to the situation.
Yes, there are many ways to skin cats, but first we need to be able to tell the difference between a cat and dog, and, if either really needs to be skinned.
Brian Allen, post: 406704, member: 1333 wrote: No, this isn't practicing law - it is (or should be) a standard tool that professional surveyors can and should use.
By definition, a boundary agreement doesn't "move" an existing line, nor does it create any "new line" or "subdivision" of land, and therefore they shouldn't be any concern of any knowledgeable gov't regulatory agency. A boundary line adjustment may trigger such concerns, but a boundary agreement doesn't because it is only the clarification of the location of an existing boundary.
Far too often we tend to throw up road blocks that simply aren't relevant to the situation.Yes, there are many ways to skin cats, but first we need to be able to tell the difference between a cat and dog, and, if either really needs to be skinned.
States must treat the concept of BLA's differently, we use them all the time to move boundary lines. It's an exception to the subdivision law here and you need to go through the planning office to execute one.
Last one I did was to take 3.6 acres out of a rural non-conforming parcel so the larger tract had to give up 3.6 acres, the 3.6 acres out of the non-conforming parcel was actually fenced into him and there was no concern about where the boundary was at the time. It's sometimes used to "square up" parcels to occupation, but not always