Corner Record - Material Discrepancy

[PE_PLS]

A County Surveyor told a surveyor I work with that he will not accept any Corner Record that shows any discrepancy, material or not. He said that the Board is in agreement with him on this issue. I had planned on filing a Corner Record for a several acre rural piece of property with original monuments per a parcel map. All measured distances are within a 0.15' of record, but none are actually record. The County Surveyor says that unless all measurements match record he will not allow a Corner Record and instead will require a ROS.

As an aside, I am not ROS averse, I file them all of the time. It just seems for this job with original monuments a ROS is total overkill. None of the discrepancies are material in my opinion.

Does anyone know if the Board has issued a formal opinion regarding this issue?

[Jim Frame]

A County Surveyor told a surveyor I work with that he will not accept any Corner Record that shows any discrepancy, material or not.

The CS doesn't get to make that call. §8773.2(b) and (c) address disagreements regarding matters shown on a Corner Record, specifying that if agreement is not reached, suitable notes be placed on the CR after which the CS files it.

If the CS feels strongly enough that the submitting surveyor has violated §8762, he can then file a complaint with BPELSG.

.

[D Ryan]

I have a couple of reactions to this.

First, CEAC's guide to the preparation of Records of Surveys and Corner Records can give insight into how most County Surveyors in general approach about this issue. Taken verbatim from said guide:

"...Material discrepancy would be any discrepancy in dimensions or positions occurring between the current survey and a survey or map of prior record such that alternate or varying conclusions or interpretations might arise between the two. Factors such as the date(s) of the survey(s), the survey methods and equipment contemporary with said date(s), land values and the requirements of the survey(s), would combine to determine the seriousness of the discrepancy, at which time a professional judgment would be rendered to justify the course of action."

Since 8773.2 of the PLS Act provides for a mechanism to handle Corner Record disagreements, (much like 8767 & 8768 for Records of Survey) I'm skeptical about the Board ever making such a claim.

If in fact you're giving us the whole story, this type of incident is discouraging to hear.

Dave Ryan,
Humboldt County

[Anthony Maffia]

The ROS charge in the county is excessive, and IMO this is a revenue generator.

[E_Page]

There is no statutory definition of "material discrepancy". It is a professional decision. The fact that there is a discrepancy of any magnitude does not make it material. And as Jim pointed out, the CS does not get to decide whether or not it is "material", and if in fact refuses to file any corner record showing any discrepancy at all, is lacking in his or her understanding of the PLSA.

The CS has two options here: 1) file the CR, with or without notes of disagreement, and file a complaint with BPELSG, or 2) file the CR, with or without notes of disagreement, and let the matter drop.

The CS does not have the option to not file the CR.


If the CS states that the Board agrees with him about not accepting a CR that shows any discrepancies, ask him to produce a copy of this opinion in which the Board contradicts the statutes. Either he won't produce it because it doesn't exist, or he may produce a copy of an opinion that he has grossly misinterpreted.

The other possibility is that you didn't get the full story and there are other issues in play or the CS had asked for other changes the surveyor didn't want to address.

[land butcher]

The ROS charge in the county is excessive, and IMO this is a revenue generator.

You are probably right.

[MikeTurnrose]

I think that it's absurd that the CS wouldn't file it because of the "discrepancies". As others have said, I think they are in the wrong as per the PLS Act. I would be surprised that the Board had made such an opinion on this. I've filed several corner records over the years in several counties with similar measurement "discrepancies". There are a lot of factors to consider that go into a surveyors decision of whether to file a CR or an RS when it comes to material discrepancies. You have to look at when the survey was done, what technology and equipment may have been used at that time, terrain, etc. It is not a cut and dry situation.

[Ian Wilson]

Hmmm....by the way, Dylan, there's a serious and glaring discrepancy in your Board Records! Do you live in a CRT or a CT? This cannot be tolerated!

Incidentally, I'm with the others. California does not have a positional tolerance statute because California licenses Professional Land Surveyors who are expected to rely on their own good judgement.

[RAM]

is it 0.15' in 25' or 0.15 feet over 1000', may or maynot be discrepant.

[Double_Proportion]

Lets split the difference and say material discrepancy is any thing say more than say 1:10,000, you are in Corner Record Land. I'm assuming (making an ass out of myself, again) that you are not surveying in say, downtown Los Angeles.

[land butcher]

It's probably harder to get 1:10000 in downtown LA than it is halfway between Victorville and Barstow.

[Double_Proportion]

It's probably harder to get 1:10000 in downtown LA than it is halfway between Victorville and Barstow.

No one said Surveying is easy; in this day in age its hard to figure ot where the surveyors job ends and the lawyers begins. Apparently. Again I have flash backs to something I read in Brown but just can't peg it.

[PLS7393]

This definitely sounds a little excessive, unless there is some supporting reasoning or justification from the CS. Like mentioned above, I agree with several comments. Like a record of survey, isn't a corner record just another interpretation of a licensed land surveyor to retrace a map of record? 0.15' is only one earthquake away. Curious if this CS is a full time county employee or a on contract, as many counties seem to be going in this direction, thinking the county will saving money.

[BoundaryMan]

I would question his authority. Do not back down, they will.

[Stephen Johnson]

The CS doesn't get to make that call. §8773.2(b) and (c) address disagreements regarding matters shown on a Corner Record, specifying that if agreement is not reached, suitable notes be placed on the CR after which the CS files it.

If the CS feels strongly enough that the submitting surveyor has violated §8762, he can then file a complaint with BPELSG.

.

I agree Jim. The CS doesn't have enough weight in his #$@ to either require or enforce his opinion on this subject. I would be real tempted to report him to the board and wherever else it is pertinent for overstepping his authority.

[Anthony Maffia]

Lets split the difference and say material discrepancy is any thing say more than say 1:10,000, you are in Corner Record Land. I'm assuming (making an ass out of myself, again) that you are not surveying in say, downtown Los Angeles.

Sounds good as a starting point. I tend to think in terms of absolutes.

[Double_Proportion]

Sounds good as a starting point. I tend to think in terms of absolutes.

I too am one who has a preference for absolutes; however in the years I have been involed in this profession, whether it be from the text's, case law, mentors or this forum, "it depends" is usually the only absolute I have ever been able to obtain; its dressed up a little better than that for conversations sake of course. That is why I believe this profession requires licensure, one must be able to weigh the "it depends" against the facts and formulate a solution and opinion that conforms to standard practice, the law, peoples property rights and common scense (this is a big one). That is why I love what I do.