I've Got A Sweet One!

[rpost]

Alright, here we go.

I am doing a pro bono survey for my client who just purchased a piece of property in the San Diego area. He needs his corners marked so he can build a fence. Yes, it requires a Record of Survey. Yes, I intend to file one.

When plotting his typo riddled legal description I encountered a couple interesting issues:

First, the current grand deed has several typos. These typos only appear on the title report used for the latest transaction and the new, current deed. It appears the title company retyped the description and made several errors, then recorded these errors on the new deed.

Second, the description (using the older, non-typo riddled deed) plots entirely within my client's neighbor's property. I ran the deed back a few years, same description. Interestingly enough, the land described in my client's deed actually shows as a dotted line on the Assessor's Plat inside the neighboring parcel. It appears as though an old, now nonexistent parcel has been reflected on the deed, possibly since the parcel's inception. It does, however, state at the end of the description "the land also known as (property address).

So, I (actually a title company) am about to run a full chain of title to determine that this is the same description that has always followed this parcel. I think it will be.

My client purchased a house with a deed location that is nowhere near his house. However, the three surrounding parcels plot perfectly. I told my client "jokingly" that I could locate all adjoining sides of his neighboring property but can't be certain that they are his.

I am now attempting to resolve the situation. I emailed the title officer listed on the PTR used for the real estate transaction outlining the issues, but I could use some advice from you folks on this subject.

To make things even more interesting, there was a Record of Survey done to one of the adjoining parcels. I find it odd that the surveyor did not catch this bust during the course of his survey. Now, maybe he was able to locate the correct description, but let’s say that the description has always been flawed. What now?

Any thoughts?

[7702]

Off track, but how can you afford to do all the work required and prepare and file a record of survey for free? Is this part of your marketing strategy?

I've done my share of free surveys in the past, but it wasn't intentional! : )

[PipeSetter]

1. file your record of survey with the note about the deed typo
2. advise your client (or clients attorney) to file a claim with his title company for vague title
3. title company will need to pursue corrective deeds. The Claim motivates them

I had a project in which two adjoining parcels were sold from an estate and
the attorneys created conflicting deeds. My client bought one lot but the
description was for the adjoining lot.
Phone calls did nothing, his attorney filed a claim with the title company stating that my client now owns both lots, This got the title companies attention and it was then corrected.

[Ian Wilson]

And ask the client to include your proper fees in the claim.

Curt never said a professional had to be a pauper. He intended his remarks to point out the fact that the professional had a greater responsibility than $. If the client can properly afford your price, charge it!

Remember the New Testement story of the Widow's might.

[7702]

Might be too late to ask for fees since a contract would have been required already.

[Brian Christensen]

"Smith" owns a property that was conveyed out as three parcels in the early 70's from "Brown" (title policy issued). In 1975 the three parcels were merged with a single parcel, parcel map (no C of C, PM prepared for Brown). In the early 90's, Jones took possesion of Brown's remaining acreage through probate. Jones' leagal reads as Brown's original deed read prior to Smith taking possesion of a portion. In 2010, Smith calls me up to prepare a BLA to merge the 3 parcels (assesed as 2 parcels). Prior to any real research or field work, I tell Smith I need a Prelim. After I receive the prelim. I discover the overlap in deeds (not disclosed on prelim.) as well as the parcel map. I advise Smith and title company accordingly.

Jones is in the middle of a divorce settlement and is unwilling to quit claim the portion in question to Smith.

Where is Smith's leverage and is the title company copable in any way?
What are my obligations?

[bruce hall]

for land surveying services was required if the client wasn't going to pay any money for it, or something along those lines. Probably mis remembered.

[Ian Wilson]

Bruce:

8759(b)(1) of the PLS Act exempts the contract requirement for clients who "...will not pay compensation." (I wonder if this extends to clients who simply refuse to pay?)

On the other hand, having a written agreement as to what you will do and what you will not do is as important in these Pro Bono surveys, if not more! Written agreements prevent missunderstandings and bad feelings - even when the survey is "free".

Brian:

There have been a few cases over the past few years that I have offered advise to friends in similar situations. They have filed claims with their title insurance companies and added provision for my further work in "fixing" the mess - from the surveying standpoint, at least...

[rpost]

Guys, thanks for the input, but I'm really not looking for contract advice or ways to extract money from my client.

I am really looking for information on the correct way to resolve the problem. It sounds like a claim will need to be opened with the title company. Hopefully this can be easily done without the procurement of a lawyer.

What is the best method to correct something like this?

[Ian Wilson]

Ryan, you're on the right track. Involving the title company will be crucial.

[land butcher]

I had a couple of cases where the new deed was missing whole lines from the previous deed. I advised my client to contact the title company and have them fix it then we could do the survey if they wanted, neither party ever responded so I do not know what happened.

I did talk to a title co officer about this one time and his reply was "If you knew how little we paid those people it's a wonder any come out right". I guess profit overrides doing what you are paid to do in the Title industry.

[TIB]

there is nothing wrong with doing a free survey for family, close friends, etc, as long as they pay filing costs

[rpost]

The title company has been working with me (no claim filed) to figure this whole thing out. By running through old deeds, we were able to piece together the 3 parcels of land all deeded to my clients parcel. All appear to be separate transactions.

Now we need to file a correction deed. The title company has asked me to write a single metes and bounds description that includes the 3 descriptions. This would theoretically eliminate the need for a 3 parcel deed. I am wondering if there is an issue with me essentially rewriting a legal description pieced together by multiple deeds to be one description. The description will be in the same location but read much cleaner.

Does this sound reasonable?

[Anthony Maffia]

Perhaps it is already one parcel, depends.

[RAM]

if you have 3 parcels by seperate transactions, why would you merge? Why not keep as 3?

[Ian Wilson]

Depending upon how the original deeds are written, re-writing as a meets and bounds (often, just metes) description could be a violation of the Subdivision Map Act. Think of a description of a parcel that potentially leaves a sliver. You've created a pair of lots from one lot outside the subdivision process.

I agree with RAM, too. Why on earth would you want to combine three perfectly good lots into one unless you absolutely had to. LLA!!!

There's a reason that it requires a license to write land descriptions. It 's not an easy thing to do! That's one of the reasons that the Subdivision process was established.

[rpost]

First of all, there would be no slivers or gaps as a result of my legal, thanks though, Ian:)

For this parcel of land: Parcel “Aâ€￾ gave 75' and created Parcel “Bâ€￾. Then for some reason parcel “Aâ€￾ gave an additional 1.77' to Parcel “Bâ€￾. Then a year later gave an additional 15' to Parcel “Bâ€￾. Without all three deed transactions, there would be lines running through the now existing house.

Since, I was able to track down all three transactions, but they never appeared altogether on one deed; I was thinking it may be of benefit for a new all-encompassing legal to be written. Actually, it was title's idea. Otherwise, we can just leave them as three separate descriptions on the same deed. By the way, title said they would pay me to rewrite one. I figured I'd at lease check it out.