Client is buying a new "manufactured home" to replace an existing trailer that is still on the property. Ideally, the old one will roll off and the new one will occupy the same spot on a 1 acre tract, although they may be getting a double wide. I have been asked not to show the existing mobile home on the survey. What kind of ethical/TBPLS issues might I have for not showing a major improvement that is on the ground at the time I do my survey? Should I wait until they have moved the old house to do the field work? Should I put a note that at the direction of the client, not all improvements are shown? Your thoughts.
If it's so important to not show the old trailer, why can't they wait until it's gone?
What happens to you if you leave it off and the guy who's gonna haul it off dies and no one comes to get it for a year?
A survey should be a statement showing all the facts as they exist at the time of the observations.
Perhaps a note stating that only the boundary is shown and internal improvements are not depicted might help, but eventually, someone is going to get hold of that survey who doesn't know what the circumstances were at the time, and you will be on the hook to explain.
Perhaps a note
In your general notes stating "Manufactured home located on lot at time of survey not delineated per owner request" or something to that effect.
RRain
"a major improvement"????
A movable mobile home does not constitute a "major improvement" to me.
I would either wait until it is gone or show it and note that it purportedly is to be removed by the owner. I think it is a big deal whether or not you depict it.
Here, if it's there the day I survey it then it will be shown on the plat as of the date I was last on site. If they don't want it shown then they have to move it off the site before I survey it. My credo is never lie or intentionally omit.
"a major improvement"????
The criteria here is whether or not the wheels have been removed. If they are gone it is a permanent structure.
Was it permitted to be there in the first place? Something smells fishy to me!
"a major improvement"????
I have a dune buggy in my yard and I took the wheels off of it, so now it is permanent?
"Snapshot in Time" is what your plat is going to represent. I'd show it to be removed.....
Andy,
I'm sure that the property owners have a deed rectriction/covenant that only allows them one mobile/manufactured home per tract, or something similar.
I would wait until the existing one is gone before doing field work, or show it.
> "Snapshot in Time" is what your plat is going to represent. I'd show it to be removed.....
And how would you know it was to be removed? Because your client told you it would be removed?
yes Ed, the intent has been established. Later if it's not removed the building inspector (or whatever they have out there) will know it was there and was intended to be removed...
What is the purpose of the survey? What do your state standards require?
I guess if you are required to show it by the state standards, then show it. The owner can't make you violate the state requirements.
Here where I survey, most boundary surveys are just that - the boundary. Improvements are not typically depicted unless asked for by the client, for a site plan that needs to be reviewed by an official eye, or an improvement that might be on or encroach a boundary line.
"a major improvement"????
> I have a dune buggy in my yard and I took the wheels off of it, so now it is permanent?
Do you have a junk yard license? 🙂
"a major improvement"????
My dune buggy is not junk, it is a kick in the "donkey".
Honestly, it only has one tire removed.
My friends 18yo daughter was driving it and hit some bushes, freaked out, overcompensated and slammed into the pump house, trashing the steering ball joint.
The request smells to me and I will not do it. I don't know if the client is trying to pull one over on the finance company by claiming they don't own a residence or what. I find it hard to believe that anyone would not consider a 16x60 foot mobile home an improvement that would not need to be located regardless of whether its wheels are on the axles or on the roof. I believe the state of Texas considers it personal property instead of real property, but to leave a "manufactured house" off of a survey is negligient IMHO.
> Here where I survey, most boundary surveys are just that - the boundary. Improvements are not typically depicted unless asked for by the client, for a site plan that needs to be reviewed by an official eye, or an improvement that might be on or encroach a boundary line.
That's an interesting point. Most all boundary surveys here imply that boundaries are resolved and improvements within them are located and depicted on the plat. Even an existing mobile home that "is to be removed" is important in that it constitutes a dwelling with all the pertinent sanitary, water and electrical utility locations that come with it. A lot of folks also erroneously think that if it's not shown on the plat that the tax assessor won't know about it:-)
I've gotta agree with Ed here. I'd never state "to be removed" on a survey. That's a private matter between other parties. This is not an set of civil eng. plans, nor am I in the business of predicting the future.
Could be a zoning issue. Maybe only one residential structure is allowed per lot or septic system.
Once you leave and the survey is done, you have no control over the outcome.
I'm asked this on rare occasions when an older stucture does not meet setback requirements and the "intent" is to raze the structure. Way back when, I honored the request once. I think that structure is still standing, ten years later.