Short and sweet. What are the opinions about including the County Parcel ID in the preamble ?
> Short and sweet. What are the opinions about including the County Parcel ID in the preamble ?
I'm a bit divided.
Is the Parcel ID based on the PLSS, as some counties appear to have begun doing? (Example here.)
The deed is read by the four corners. What if down the road a boundary dispute arises from a discrepancy between the parcel ID and the aliquot description of a portion of the section?
Your method would in a manner of speaking appear to increase redundancy, but could you be held liable for an error in the preamble?
No way, that may be stepping into a bear trap.
I would never try to legitimize an ID map.
In some way it could be including the ID map as a part of your certification that everything is correct. Most ID maps have some error that is out of your control.
You are describing what is now the case. It would not be invalid to identify the parcel described as being all or a part of a tax parcel even though over time those facts might change.
That said, I believe it is more important to provide a reproducible tie-down and call out the adjoiners.
I would NEVER refer to the County Tax Parcel No. in this jurisdiction because the parcel configuration I might be referring to now is subject to change in the future via Property Line Adjustment, Partition, Subdivision, court action, etc.
If asking about a Tax Lot number on an assessors map, don't use it. They can be changed by the Assessor with no consideration of anything but taxes.
jud
Writing a description>Jud
For that reason I would not reference tax ID's in a description.
In addition, the language of the description must be taken as whole and using a Tax ID may lend confusion if someone can represent that the Tax ID is different than the written description. For instance is you use "and shown on Tax map XX as Parcel XX" I may dispute that your description covers the parcel shown and create ambiguity.
my 0.04'
Dtp
Agree with most above
Those numbers can change with time for a variety of reasons.
Don
As Wattles already stated...
"Don't use references to quasi-public information in descriptions"
WATTLES, Appendix, "Do's and Don't's";-)
Short and sweet. We ain't doing it 😉
Really? I don’t have a huge amount of experience in boundary surveying in Tennessee, but I've got close to 100 deeds on my desk right now and none reference an assessors map. If this indeed happens I’ll add it to my list of strange and confounding practices common in boundary surveying in Tennessee.
I agree with those who say not to put it in the description. Neither grantor nor grantee have any control with what the County Assessor does with the numbers. A description based on APN could get screwed up in short order if the assessor decides to renumber and for some reason reuses numbers rather than retiring them.
Having said that, it is sometimes helpful to have the APN referenced somewhere on the page. The best way I've seen it done is as a notation after the end of the description. That way it is not part of the description but is there so you can quickly identify it on current or old APMs depending upon whether there had been a renumbering. I've also seen it near the top of the 1st page of a conveyance in the box that says "Upon filing, send copy to:". As long as it is in a place where it is clearly not part of the property description, your OK.
I didn't say I recommend using the Tax Map & Parcel ID numbers in a description. I just don't know that it's wrong.
In the TN counties I've done deed research in over the years, the recorded copy of the instrument has that information on it, added by the Register of Deeds staff. I suppose for that reason, if no other, to put it in the description would be redundant.
Writing a description>Jud
> For that reason I would not reference tax ID's in a description.
>
> In addition, the language of the description must be taken as whole and using a Tax ID may lend confusion if someone can represent that the Tax ID is different than the written description. For instance is you use "and shown on Tax map XX as Parcel XX" I may dispute that your description covers the parcel shown and create ambiguity.
>
> my 0.04'
> Dtp
While I don't use the reference tax ID in a description and think it might be a bad idea, I am thinking that if you did, wouldn't the reference be the Tax ID number at the time of the writing of the description? Could I use the same "for instance" in referencing an artificial monument, and if the monument got moved or replaced with another monument; and/or if another surveyor disputes that that monument is not the corner.....it could create an ambiguity....?
I am only playing devil's advocate, but I agree in general to not put the tax id number on; especially in the preamble.
Writing a description>Jud
wouldn't that create an ambiguity all in itself?
Agree with most above
> Those numbers can change with time for a variety of reasons.
>
> Don
I agree with Don. I never quote a tax parcel ID number because one person in that office could decide for any reason (or no reason at all) to change the numbers.
Larry P
No, they change over time. Our CAD whenever a tract is sold out calls it A or B or whatever.
Don't waste the time and possibility of cornfusing folks. Call out the record and roll on.
