Multiple lots, same plat number, the lots changed over the years, need advice
About four decades ago, a husband and wife purchased a piece of land that had five lots labeled 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 on the same plat. Over the years, the same owners created subdivisions, and the lots became 5, 46, 49, 115, and 117. The property lines changed with each subdivision on lot 5, 46 and 49. The couple sold off lots 5 and 49. Lots 115 and 117 were never included in any subdivision plan. From each subdivision map, you can see that the two lots were lot 5 originally. Then, they are pictured in the proposed subdivision on the plat map, however, they are listed as already existing lots. They were not proposed lots for the subdivision plan. It is like they just were created out of thin air. There is no legal description for them on any deed, they are not included in any subdivision as a "proposed lot." Is there a way to change a lot number without a subdivision plan? Moreover, is the mere reference to the two lots in the plat map on the subdivision plan, sufficient? I assumed not because the remainder of the lots were labeled "proposed lots" on the subdivision plans and those two lots were labeled with their plat/lot number without the "proposed" label. However, the husband and wife now need to transfer title and there is no valid legal description anywhere. Has anyone encountered anything like this before?
<div>From each subdivision map, you can see that the two lots were lot 5 originally.</div>
Post the map so we can see what you are talking about.
The laws in place in your location and at the times of the various sales and splits will have everything to do with the answer. It sounds like quite a mess.
However, the husband and wife now need to transfer title and there is no valid legal description anywhere.
The plat itself would be the legal description, but it sounds like various property splits were done by redrawing this plat several times. Whether that's allowed or not depends on your local rules regarding splits, so you'll need to do some homework on that.
Assuming these paper splits are allowed then maybe all you need to do is get a title company or lawyer to draft a deed that references this Frankenstein plat and you're good to go.
Norman is correct. Around here, you can ask the county for a determination whether a lot is a "legal lot of record" or not.
I'd be curious as to what the tax bills say. If they are seperate and the county or town recognizes them, there's gonna be a tax bill.
I just filed a Record of Survey on a lot in a Parcel Map (CA-speak for a small subdivision). The Parcel Map consists of 6 lots from a prior Final Map (CA-speak for a large subdivision). The lots are contiguous along a single street, and are bracketed by other lots from the Final Map. The Parcel Map shifted the original Final Map lot lines by various amounts (couple of feet), but retained the same lot numbers from the Final Map. The measured lot widths fit the record dimensions from the Parcel Map, but the County Surveyor wanted me to show the record lot widths from the Final Map in parentheses, as though there was a discrepancy. I declined, and instead added a general note about the duplicate lot numbers and the differing lot widths between the two record maps.
The point here is that reusing lot numbers when you're changing lot dimensions is a bad idea, it can only lead to confusion.
Around here all new subdivisions, regardless if they happen to include parts of existing subdivisions, must start with Lot 1, Block 1 and the sequential from there. I see zero issue in this. It's Lot 1, Block 1 of Smith 2nd addition as recorded in ...... how someone would confuse that with Lot 1, Block 1 of Smith 1st addition is beyond me.
