Can monuments be reset in a different position

goodgps · Post by **goodgps** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 7:44 am

It its fine as long as they havent been used for improvements.
Face it, misteaks happen to everyone. Sometimes they are not caught right away. I believe it is more noble to address and correct an error rather than ignore it and try to justify later.
I'm assuming you are talking about a significant mis-placement and not just a few tenths.

Common errors not caught, are field crew setting monuments at an old ROW without adding the dedication. Old errors were turning a complimentary angle. (Old timers know this) Those sloppy single turners.
Today we can get poor PDOP or GPS geometry, which can cause errors.
Topmount distance meter guys used to blow 5 or ten feet once in a while.
I usually call the company and give them the opportunity to correct this.
Even after a map has been recorded 5 years !!

I'm certain we will see some legal quotes from our smarter friends. I'm looking forward to their comments too :}

"Good" and rotten

Ric7308 · Post by **Ric7308** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 2:00 pm

Jbrinn,

I think the public would be better served by either filing a Certificate of Correction that follows the original PM, or possibly filing Corner Records showing the "new" monuments and the relationship to the current ones.

How can you ever be certain that anyone hasn't relied on those monuments or the position? Other Land Surveyors, adjacent property owners, fence contractors, etc.

I guess it can be argued that if someone discovered the error (you) and the fact that the current monuments do not coincide with the recorded document and positions, that could be considered a material descrepancy (not sure how far we are talking in this situation) with what is shown on record maps, then filing an Record of Survey would be required.

I would suggest having a discussion with the County Surveyor for that opinion and/or if you want, I would be happy to look at the actual information to see what suggestions I think would be most appropriate. Pulling the current monuments is not one.

Ric

goodgps · Post by **goodgps** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 2:11 pm

How then do we treat a monument found in a grossly wrong position but determined by investigation to have been moved by "others" such as utility trenching activities, angry owners/neighbors etc.

These misdemeanors often go unpunished, yet I hear that if a surveyor catches an error, goes out to "fix" that error pulls and correctly places, well someone is ready to report him to the board.
Reporting a fellow Landsurveyor to the board is very harsh talk.
This is reserved for very gross continuing negligence.

When we discover that perfect flawless surveyor, we will construct a monument to his honor. . . .then he'll probably call us a tenth off.

Ric7308 · Post by **Ric7308** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 2:42 pm

"How then do we treat a monument found in a grossly wrong position but determined by investigation to have been moved by "others" such as utility trenching activities, angry owners/neighbors etc."

You set the monument in what you feel is the correct (and original) location and file a CR or RS, whichever is appropriate. If you feel that the "others" acted in an inappropriate manner, address that with them, the nearest Chapter JPPC and/or the Board.

"These misdemeanors often go unpunished, yet I hear that if a surveyor catches an error, goes out to "fix" that error pulls and correctly places, well someone is ready to report him to the board."

More times than not, these "misdemeanors" go unpunished because the one finding the "misdemeanor" would much rather complain about the issue then bother with protecting the public and holding themselves and their peers to an appropriate standard.

"Reporting a fellow Landsurveyor to the board is very harsh talk."

Is it more harsh than privately complaining to peers at a meeting or to other professionals when that Land Surveyor's name comes up in conversation? How does that help that Land Surveyor?...the profession?...the public?

Personally, I would contact that Land Surveyor first to compare notes and allow that individual the professional "benefit of the doubt". If indeed it is determined an error, than that Land Surveyor has the opportunity to proactively fix the error. I have found that the more respect I show to the other party, the more I receive in return. Land Surveyors typically are proud of their work and do not want their efforts to be viewed in a negative sense.

"This is reserved for very gross continuing negligence."

How do you determine what is "very gross continuing negligence" unless you establish an appropriate standard to base that determination on? If over a period of time, you come to expect a substandard quality of work from a specific individual, when does it become "very gross"? And haven't you established a loose "standard" by allowing it to continue, while privately complaining, without bringing it to that individual's attention?

"When we discover that perfect flawless surveyor,..."

There are no perfect Land Surveyors. But together as a group, a professional group, we can consistently strive to achieve that level of service, so that the collective public perception of our profession is based upon the highest quality opinion.

Mission Statement from the CLSA Home Page:

CLSA advances the interests of the profession of Land Surveying, to maintain the highest possible standards of professional ethics and practice, to encourage uniformity of practices and procedures, and foster public faith in and understanding of Land Surveyors and their work.

That statement says it all.

Ric

RAM · Post by **RAM** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:06 pm

We had a job where the client quit paying after we had set our monuments, on the advice of a local shark (att.) we filed a R/S, but made no reference to the former clients name on the map. Fortunaly we had also been working for 2 of the neighbors. According to the shark, once you set the monuments, the monuments are owned by the land owner, even if ther is no payment.

goodgps · Post by **goodgps** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 3:46 pm

"Reporting a fellow Landsurveyor to the board is very harsh talk."

[Is it more harsh than privately complaining to peers at a meeting or to other professionals when that Land Surveyor's name comes up in conversation? How does that help that Land Surveyor?...the profession?...the public?]

Yes, I hate that kind of stuff too. It is better to approach the surveyor first hand than to just file a board complaint. [see examples post]

[Personally, I would contact that Land Surveyor first to compare notes and allow that individual the professional "benefit of the doubt". If indeed it is determined an error, than that Land Surveyor has the opportunity to proactively fix the error. I have found that the more respect I show to the other party, the more I receive in return. Land Surveyors typically are proud of their work and do not want their efforts to be viewed in a negative sense.]

This is always the best approach. [see examples post]

"This is reserved for very gross continuing negligence."

['''How do you determine what is "very gross continuing negligence" unless you establish an appropriate standard to base that determination on? If over a period of time, you come to expect a substandard quality of work from a specific individual, when does it become "very gross"? And haven't you established a loose "standard" by allowing it to continue, while privately complaining, without bringing it to that individual's attention?''']

"When we discover that perfect flawless surveyor,..."

["""There are no perfect Land Surveyors. But together as a group, a professional group, we can consistently strive to achieve that level of service, so that the collective public perception of our profession is based upon the highest quality opinion."""]

Well said, but we must reckognize the difference between neglegence and error. The neglegent surveyor may only care about his wallet or quitting time.
The errant surveyor may be a victim of a neglegent party chief, weariness, interruptions, unnecessary thought redirects from employees, phones, clients, family, friends etc.

It would be nice if we were all in a cubicle with but only one job to focus.
Single minded thoughts worry me when it is clear that our profession requires open mindedness, careful consideration and open communication (like this wonderful forum)

Remember, unlike lawyers, who work only for the interest of their client, We are charged to find the best solution of intent. If we have evidence that our Fellow Surveyor intends to be fraudulent, then by all means take action for the good of the whole.

I'm sorry you have whiners in your chapter. bummer dude

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 4:40 pm

Why are w talking about another surveyor moving a monument to an erroneous position? How often does that actually happen?

Good started the "moved" discussion citing utility workers and angry landowners.

Ric? JPPC for that???? I don't think so.

I think that removing or moving a monument is case dependent. Can you prove it has been moved from it's original position? Are all the affected landowners agreeable to your removing it or moving it? If the answer is yes, then go ahead and do it.

Right about now, a couple of guys who are of the mind that no monument can ever be moved are coming out of their seats. Before you start typing your reply, take a breath, have a drink, and re-read the part where I referred to ALL AFFECTED LANDOWNERS. If they're all good with it, the old mons become useless junk and potential points of future confusion.

Just make certain that you are able to identify that full group.

If even one of those landowners is less than comfortable with it, leave them in and set your new ones, referencing the old ones on your new map.

Jbrinn, this same logic applies to your situation. (Didn't we discuss this a year or so ago on this forum?) Figure out who all is in the group of ALL AFFECTED LANDOWNERS (notice that I said ALL) and explain the situation to them. If they ALL understand the situation and NONE of them take issue with you moving the mons, go ahead and do it, and then follow it up with whatever recordable documentation you need to reflect the correction.

Many surveyors approach these sort of situations as if we operate in our little cadastral vacuum and don't need to, or can't confer with clients and other landowners and consider their input in our decisions.

Whose corners do the monuments represent? Who owns the monuments? You may have set them, and they may have your number on them, and when we find monuments we look at th number and say "That's one of Ric's (or Ian's, or Russ', or...) irons", but the correct answer to both questions is that the corners and the monuments are the client's and his neighbor's. Of all the opinions of what to do with erroneous monuments, our opinion really matters the least.

Keep in mind what it is we do and who we do it for.

If ALL AFFECTED LANDOWNERS are of the mind that the monuments should be moved, who's going to file a complaint? If you leave a clean, non-confusing set of monuments, will they feel that you served them well? Conversely, if you leave multiple sets of monuments, some that the landowners are agreeing to use, and leave those "wrong" ones, will they be pleased with you a few months or years down the road when they don't remember which one they are supposed to use? I would think that would be a constant reminder to them of the incompetence of "that surveyor we had in here back in '08" and the profession in general.

Jim Frame · Post by **Jim Frame** » Wed Sep 10, 2008 8:21 pm

Here's my take on the matter: If a surveyor sets a monument in a place not consistent with the position his map indicates, and he subsequently discovers the problem, he should first check to see if there are any recorded references to the monument other than his own. If not, and he returns to the field and finds that there's been no apparent reliance by the adjoiners on the monument's position (e.g. absence of new improvements), then in my opinion he's at liberty to remove the errant monument and reset it in its intended location.

I don't buy the concept that the monument belongs to the client. He "owns" the marked corner location, but absent a contract stating that a particular monument -- not a particular type of monument, but rather a particular identifiable physical item -- is to be delivered into the possession of the client, the monument is merely intended to mark the position of the corner as determined by the land surveyor. If it doesn't mark that location, absent reliance it's up to the surveyor to move it so that it does.

Ric7308 · Post by **Ric7308** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:46 am

Interesting concept regarding who owns the monument. I need to think about that a little while....

goodgps · Post by **goodgps** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 9:20 am

Thanks to Evan and Jim for putting down sensible words.
Sorry I was in such a snit about this, the "turn a fellow surveyor into the board" concept drives me crazy.

Evans "Affected parties" statment makes sense. If there was no action taken on the erroneous position, it can be cleanly corrected.

In the days of transit, I turned a complimentary angle and set a pipe.

I awoke at 3 am the next day following a dream of having done this.

By 5 am, we were out there checking the work and corrected the point.
The property owners came out to see this. My client said he thought I'd made a mistake but he was more than willing to move his levee to the errant line. The other owner stated he never knew where the line was in the first place. We caught this error just in time.

Case by case may be the best resolve for these situations.

and to RIC,... No, We never move or remove another surveyors monument.
(although I've seen some civil engineers do this)

"good"

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 9:42 am

Darn civils! Don't let 'em out of the office for fear they might wreak havoc on our boundaries! ;-)

D Ryan · Post by **D Ryan** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 10:19 am

Relating to Jim Frame's take on ownership of the monuments, I just recently had a revelation on this same subject. I also don't feel the land owner "owns" the monument like some sort of deliverable in a contract. I would go so far as to say it's quasi-public ownership since neither adjoiner has the right to disturb or destory it, pursuant to the law that requires them to maintain their common boundaries. But like Ric, said, I'm still mulling this concept over since it's kind of new to my thinking.

And I do believe there are instances, albeit limited, when one can, and should, remove his own monuments. And file the appropriate record.

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 11:26 am

Let me clarify my previous statement.

Once the monument is placed and the job is done, the surveyor no longer owns the monument. I did not mean to imply that it was equivalent to a deliverable material or piece of workmanship like a fence or a driveway.

My view is similar to yours, Dave. As I said before, it belongs to the client AND HIS NEIGHBOR. Additionally, the landowner of any other property that might utilize the monument as marking a controlling corner for that property has an interest in that monument. Such a person would fall under the category of ALL AFFECTED LANDOWNERS.

The only instances where I would consider the monument to belong to the more broad "General Public" is if it marks a PLSS corner, references a public RW, or was otherwise originally placed by some public entity or controls the lines of some public boundary or fixed work.

But the main point is that once the monument is placed and the project completed, the monument no longer is the surveyor's to act upon under his authority alone.

Dave Karoly, PLS · Post by **Dave Karoly, PLS** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 1:18 pm

Anything attached to the land as a fixture is part of the land.

This includes the monuments you set.

Come'on people, this is basic real property law here, not the personal feelings of Land Surveyors.

from Black's
"Fixture. An article in the nature of personal property which has been so annexed to the realty that it is regarded as a part of the land.
...
A thing is deemed to be affixed to land when it is attached to it by roots, imbedded in it..."

If the monument is on a corner common to 4 properties then all four owners own the monument.

goodgps · Post by **goodgps** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 1:29 pm

After reading and considering this problem, perhaps it truely is in the best interest of the Profession to have the "errant" surveyor file a certificate of correction or corner record, whereby he acknowledges his errant momument and resolves it with paperwork and a correctly placed monument. (although I still hate the idea of the other one(s) remaining there for confusion) [remember, land owners just react to what they find, they don't run to the county to do research]

maybe this will clean up the situation

and reduce sloppy work in the future.
There are field checks to avoid or remedy bad calcs

Peter Ehlert · Post by **Peter Ehlert** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 1:49 pm

goodgps: whoever you are...
I think you are now on the right track... preserve the position and nature of the monument forever and for everyone with a proper record.

who owns it? ME! and everyone else.
if it will make trouble, pull it out! someone may get POed so make sure you can duplicate the actual position (or any other surveyor for that matter)

survey 101

PS: things are not nearly so good up here, be thankful!

Ian Wilson · Post by **Ian Wilson** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 1:51 pm

Once again, we come to the old adage:

Doctors visit their mistakes in the cemetery.
Attorneys visit their mistakes in the penitentiary.
Surveyors put iron pipes in the ground and file maps to memorialize their mistakes and place them in the public record for all time.

Boundary surveying is not a "life-or-death" thing....it's MUCH more serious than that!

Let me ask this: You are in the field and set a pipe. Upon checking your back site, you realize that you've made a blunder and the pipe is actually 1 foot out of position.

Do you...

a) leave the pipe in the ground and set a new one...once the pipe is set, it can never be moved,

b) shovel some dirt on the pipe and file a map showing it in the correct place,

c) pull the bloody thing and set it, or another pipe, in the correct position, or

d) something else entirely?

goodgps · Post by **goodgps** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 1:59 pm

At the time of discovery, which should be before you leave the jobsite, and or at the moment of reviewing your "as-set" point coordinate file, One would think that you GO PUT IT WHERE IT BELONGS.

If proper cheske were not made or ignored and left for two years, like the thread begins, then I'd agree to file paperwork for the world to see and put a new corner where it should be OR pay for the LLA that needs to be , because of improvements. (I'm still under the impression that we are speaking of a substantial error here)

"good" hidden for now til trial ends"sorry"

Ric7308 · Post by **Ric7308** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 2:32 pm

Can't help this...just noticed a post on the POB forum where an Engineer didn't like where the Land Surveyor set rough grade stakes for the road clearing and decided to "move" them closer to the centerline. No one noticed until the crew went back out to set slope stakes and noticed a bunch of trees that needed to be moved before grading. Apparently the contractor is back charging the Land Surveyor and it appears that the Land Surveyor and Engineer work for the same firm, not really sure.

Couldn't get past some of the similarities in this...

So, if the Engineer designed the project and the Land Surveyor set the stakes, but the Engineer moved the stakes, who actually owns the stakes?

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 2:56 pm

Those stakes can be paid for with the savings of not having to pay the engineer's salary anymore.

Like I said before, don't let them out of the office! You never know what trouble they will cause once set loose on the real world.

Jim Frame · Post by **Jim Frame** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 3:01 pm

I'll posit that corner monuments are neither real property nor chattel. The fact that they mark (or purport to mark) real property ownership limits puts them into a category similar to that of official records: they're owned by the public, but managed by those authorized by the state to do so according to the applicable standard of care. In the case of official records, the County Recorder and his/her designated subordinates are given sole control; in the case of parcel corner markers, licensed land surveyors hold that privilege and responsibility.

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 4:06 pm

OK, if all survey monuments are public property, pick a random Parcel Map out of your county and identify a monumented interior corner common only to two parcels.

What is my interest in that monument? What is my legal basis to claim any interest in it or to object to someone moving it? How is that monument considered to be owned by the public?

To lodge any sort of complaint, say for malicious destruction, must first have standing. I very much doubt that the court will recognize your standing because you are a member of the public. So you won't even get to address the alleged malicious intent.

The "public" is a very nebulous group. I have corners of my parcel that are common with only one other lot. Can you define who are the members of the "public" that owns these monuments along with my neighbor and I? If my neighbor and I get together and decide that we want to yank that monument and put a fence post right where it used to be, so what? Whose to stop us, and by what authority?

Jim and Peter, you're each claiming partial ownership to those monuments on my property. Do you really care and does it really matter to anyone other than me and my neighbor if we pull that iron?

The County Recorder has no control over the disposition of those monuments. Furthermore, the County Recorder has no authority to enter upon my land to check the status of that monumentation or for any other reason without my permission to enter.

A surveyor may not enter upon my land except when performing a survey which requires him to enter upon my land. But he may not do so simply for no other reason than to ensure that my monuments are still in the ground.

Unless you can show me the contrary, your idea that all survey monuments belong to the broader public as opposed to only those whose boundaries are either marked or otherwise controlled by the positions marked by those monuments, is lacking in solid argument.

There might be a law or legal principle to support your position. If so, I'd like to hear it.

Jim Frame · Post by **Jim Frame** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 4:50 pm

"There might be a law or legal principle to support your position. If so, I'd like to hear it."

For starters, there's the fact that my survey, which references the monument I set at a corner of your property, is filed in the public records. Proper retracement of portions of that survey -- which may or may not be adjacent to your property -- may require access to the monument delineating your parcel.

Note that I didn't suggest that the general public has any right to mess with "your" monument. I did say that the State of California, in its infinite wisdom, has licensed certain individuals to mess with it if doing so is necessary in the legitimate practice of their profession.

"Jim and Peter, you're each claiming partial ownership to those monuments on my property."

Actually, I don't claim ownership. What I do claim is a professional responsibility to manage monuments pertaining to my survey, and/or the public record referencing those monuments, in a manner that best serves the interests of the public. That responsibility may mean resetting an errant monument, with documentation where appropriate.

"The County Recorder has no control over the disposition of those monuments."

Agreed. My reference to the County Recorder was one of comparison, not equivalence.

Note that I'm not advocating wanton disturbance of established boundary control marks. Furthermore, I take reasonable precautions to prevent blunders when I set monuments. However, I believe strongly that if I set a monument in error, I have not only a right but a responsibility to rectify that error. In many cases, that responsibility can be satisfied by simply pulling up the offending mark and moving to its intended location (no harm, no foul). If some reliance upon the monument has occurred, then the situation gets more complicated (and, generally, more expensive).

Ian Wilson · Post by **Ian Wilson** » Thu Sep 11, 2008 6:04 pm

I would tend to side with Jim on this one. The interior monument common to only two parcels may well APPEAR to be "out of hte way", however, it IS part of the landnet. In the absence of other more critical monuments that are "more accessible", that tucked away one may well become VERY important to all the lots in the area!

E_Page · Post by **E_Page** » Fri Sep 12, 2008 6:44 am

I wasn't arguing that these monuments are not important. But who has the authority to tell the neighbors in such a circumstance that they can't remove a monument?

How many surveys have you been on where previous monumentation was missing? (it might be easier to count surveys you have done where all the monuments were still present)

Even if you so disposed to turn them in to the monument cops, who would you call? Who would have the authority prosecute, fine, or even chastise the landowners for destroying one or more monuments around their property?

Alright, this turn of conversation is getting off topic. Back to original topic: correcting monument locations for a PM that you filed 2 years previous.

If you can verify that there has been no reliance, fix them and file whatever you need to file to reflect the correction.

How do you verify whether there has been any reliance? Talk to the landowners for one thing. Most likely, they will want you to correct them.

If there has been any reliance, it is no longer your decision.

California Surveyors Forums

Can monuments be reset in a different position

good thoughts

grumpy old surveyor

Ownership of monument?