It's called the ......
A surveyor's job is not to locate ownership lines. A surveyor's job is to locate boundaries. This has nothing to do with transferring title; that is adverse possession. This is just locating a boundary where it has always been. There is no need for the exchange of deeds.
It's called the ......
:good:
It's called the ......
>Many times, it has to have met an element of time, and other issues. Including the fact that neither party knew where a deeded line was.
I'm home today and my copy of Skelton is in the office but....
I believe he also brings up a number of cases where the parties "acquiesce" to a line in the mistaken belief that it is the line that would be established per a survey of the deeds. In these cases, although they have acquiesced to a line for the statutory time frame, they are not estopped from claiming to the "deed" line.
It's called the ......
> When will we learn?
When the landowners and their attorney's start figuring out they can sue us for damages caused by our ignorance.
I don't think that's a straw man argument. The whole premise depends on what is in the 'mind' of the landowners. It says so right in the post.
I agree, we should talk to owners of the adjacent lands ....when that is called for. Not every boundary survey requires me to knock on doors and take evidence. Hell, most people think their boundaries are at the water meter or fence post or power pole.. whatever the realtor told them.
Maybe I just don't deal with a lot of boundary issues where the actual lines are NOT clearly recorded. If you are going over hill and dale to find an old tree or mouth of a stream, I can see where this would be a regular occurrence.
It's called the ......
Do those boundary lines monument the edge of ownership? Exchange deed documents, leave the proper paper trail. Boundary Line agreements are agreements between owners, the surveyor does not have the authority to make that decision for the owners or to imply that his opinion is the final authority. If the line agreed to was always the line and that line can be located, no agreement is needed. Forget about such things and exchange deed documents that transfer title to the occupation lines. Just because you can do something and get away with it does not mean that it is the proper or most equitable thing to do.
jud
It's called the ......
From my view the surveyors duty is to seek out the evidence and such to determine whether a line is established by acquiescence. You just don't get there and figure that your interpretation of the deed and the boundary they all appear to have excepted is out of whack. You must look into it much further. Interview the parties and former parties and others that might shed some light. Find out the details about the physical feature being used as the boundary. Study old aerial photography to find out about how long these features been in place. Study all the record documents, see how any mentioned landmarks relate. Basically you need to gather all the evidence sort of in the view that the court would need to have this if they were the ones to make the judgment. You are not authorized to fix the boundary for the parties, that is for the parties or the court if they can't.
But on the other hand you have been retained to give an opinion about the boundary so either way you could be wrong (determined the deed line when acquiescence has occurred or called acquiescence when it hasn't occurred). Somebody needs to do all the legwork to back up the position of the established boundary. So after all that you must lay it on the line and give them an opinion. I don't see any deference in calling it either way if you are wrong. Why should calling it wrong only one way be safe for the surveyor. You don't have anymore right to undo an established line from acquiescence than to acquiesce to a line that shouldn't be. So I suppose if you can't give a well informed opinion you should walk away. That would be better than starting a war.
It's called the ......
> >Many times, it has to have met an element of time, and other issues. Including the fact that neither party knew where a deeded line was.
>
> I'm home today and my copy of Skelton is in the office but....
>
> I believe he also brings up a number of cases where the parties "acquiesce" to a line in the mistaken belief that it is the line that would be established per a survey of the deeds. In these cases, although they have acquiesced to a line for the statutory time frame, they are not estopped from claiming to the "deed" line.
True, for some juridictions. That is why we need to know the laws in the specific states we practice in.
It's called the ......
:good: :good: :good:
It's called the ......
> Do those boundary lines monument the edge of ownership? Exchange deed documents, leave the proper paper trail. Boundary Line agreements are agreements between owners, the surveyor does not have the authority to make that decision for the owners or to imply that his opinion is the final authority. If the line agreed to was always the line and that line can be located, no agreement is needed. Forget about such things and exchange deed documents that transfer title to the occupation lines. Just because you can do something and get away with it does not mean that it is the proper or most equitable thing to do.
> jud
Jud, I'm sorry but I think you are confusing a few issues. If, for example I find an old fence line between Smith and Jones has met all the requiements for a boundary by agreement, there is no need to exchange deeds. The agreed boundary, by definiton is the line called for in the deeds. When you ask the owners to exchange deeds, you are then creating a transfer of land which can raise many issues such as local regulations. When you "quit claim" the property between owners you are changing the "what". A boundary by agreement only locates the "where" on the ground. It is not a transfer. Why would you want to exchange deeds other than to prevent some future surveyor from screwing it up? Yes, sometimes preparing and filing boundary line agreements are appropriate - sometimes they can cause unforseen problems and are unnecessary.
It's called the ......
In RI only the only way to quiet title is through superior court, they MAY have a claim to property but we as surveyors measure and report. If there's an actual unknown boundary, not by the owners but because of conveyances, then we can do a boundary line agreement. If people are going to accept occupation as a property line then all we as surveyors are doing is pounding in an iron rod at the ends of fences and charging them money, they could have done that themselves.
alpha
I am afraid you have spoken for many surveyors who have the opinion that a surveyor must perform expert measurements on the deed distances, set a two-bit rebar, ignore other corner monuments and go home.
That is certainly not my opinion on the duties of a land surveyor.
A land surveyor's judgement has nothing to do with measurement!!
Keith
Link to the case
To me it is merely a correct retracement survey. I think it was incorrect to decide it under an acquiesence claim, but the court can only decide based on the claims put forth (usually). Today a licensed surveyor may be required in order to subdivide, but that certainly was not always the case. I can't imagine throwing out all old surveys that were not performed by licensed surveyors or engineers (they didn't even issue licenses in some states until after this property was surveyed). I also can't imagine claiming all those old lines are nothing more than agreements. They were surveyed and modern surveyors should find the evidence and retrace them.
Link to the case
[sarcasm]But what if the deed distances don't match what's in the field?[/sarcasm]
What it seems to me is there are a whole bunch of surveyors that jump on boundary survey with the preconceived notion of what the cost should be, and leave themselves no outs contractually if it turns out to be something other than what they thought it should be. Such as fence lines, conflicting deed descriptions, and so forth. So for example, someone wants their lot from a 1970 subdivision monumented. Yes I can do that for $500 flat fee. When they get to the field they do a search for the monuments and find none, so they put the corners in from record from 3 found center line monuments even though it puts an old subdivision fence 5' encroached onto the neighbor’s property. Wrong! The surveyor should have an out in their contract at that point. They (the surveyor) will not proceed until the issue is resolved to the surveyor’s satisfaction. Many of you out there in the real world might agree with this thought but think that you cannot run your practice this way if you want to feed your family! I believe that is where our profession needs to become more professional and come together with our business practices. So at the end of your survey the property owner doesn’t have one surveyor’s opinion but a truly resolved and mapped boundary to rely on. My 2 cents, Jp
Link to the case
Ahh, a dead giveaway, then you know you're actually performing a retracement:) I know, what's so hard to understand about that?
There are at least a couple of reasons:
1) Lack of training in how and why. Formal education and training programs are largely slanted towards science, engineering and mathematics. There is only so many instructional hours in a Bachelor's degree and those are mostly used up with things other than boundary law.
2) The culture of the profession has traditionally favored fast, scientific answers. In California the Land Surveying profession has been closely tied to the Civil Engineering profession since the beginning. Land Surveyors were first licensed in 1892 and Civil Engineers in 1930. Most Land Surveyors prior to 1930 billed themselves as "Civil Engineer" and it only said "State Licensed Land Surveyor" under the signature line. Most Surveying here is tied to engineering projects; time is money, hence the need for a fast boundary solution. Bring in the Deed dimensions.
You asked why.
A few seem to understand that the purpose of a profession is to serve society, not the other way around but with the overwhelming pressures from the above I don't see much changing until the profession either dies out or is able to take over boundaries entirely and impose our mania for straight, perfect lines on society.
Link to the case
A lot of guys don't think about the fact or theory that maybe the fence is the best evidence of where the original monuments once were. Forget acquiescence if you can ascertain the fence as a witness (of sorts) to the original line. Once you can make that tie, it is truely a retracement land-survey issue, where you are a higher-level expert than the lawyers, and other "quasi-surveyors". The fact that the neighbors have always used the fence, would also support the fence as possibly being set per the boundary markers.
James..
Similarly, in Oklahoma, deed lines are conscripted separately in the law from "division fences" or "fences of convenience."
What gets troublesome is that case law has relied upon Statutes like this one:
R.L.1910, § 6622.
§60-49. Easements attached to land.
The following land burdens or servitudes upon land, may be attached to other land as incidents or appurtenances, and are then called easements:
...
13. The right of receiving more than natural support from adjacent land or things affixed thereto;
14. The right of having the whole of a division fence maintained by a coterminous owner;
thus in the eyes of some courts, a fence that divides two estates and does not necessarily follow a deed line creates a prescriptive easement for the dominant estate.
Link to the case
Yeah, the legal terminology I would use is that the fence is an "accessory" to the corner. Corroborating evidence of that can be largely historical rather than parole. In my area fences were built between the corners (many times trees or wood stakes) and the historical record supports that. Other places maybe it was not the custom, but the historical record should show it one way or the other. Then ya get some testimony and weigh its credibility. Let's face it, people will remember what is best for them in many instances (whether intending to or not).
