California Surveyors Forums

This is fun!

I received a call pertaining a potential property survey by a neighbor 1.
I gave him an approximate cost for a boundary survey, and he finds another surveyor to perform the survey cheaper than my approximate cost, and wants to negotiate. I told him my cost is already adjusted, and it is only approximate, but I can meet with him to see the situation before I prepare a proposal.

I make a field visit to visit the site and meet with the potential client before a proposal is prepared. I advised him it is always best to work boundary issues out between neighbors, but the only way to establish the boundary is to hire me for a boundary survey and file the appropriate document with the County Surveyor. I gave him my viewpoint and some suggestions before I left. No contract has been prepared, or any agreements that he is my client.

The situation is there is an existing side fence, 6 foot tall. If extended towards the street, it will go through the middle of a brick planter with existing rose bushes. The bricks are of the same character and age as layed in the adjoining driveway. Evidently the prior neighbor to (neighbor 2) extended the garage and built the planter at the same time. No knowledge of any communications between the two previous neighbors. I also recommended that he (neighbor 1) go to the planning department and get a copy of the plans for the garage addition, in hopes it shows any building setbacks.

The following day I receive a phone call from the neighbor (neighbor 2), inquiring about a boundary survey. I informed her about my communication with her neighbor, but no contract has been prepared or executed at the time. I mentioned that I offered a meeting between neighbors to split the cost of a survey, or consult between the two parties. She further informed me that the police were out at the property at the request of neighbor 1 accusing her (neighbor 2) of cutting his rose bushes, and the police told neighbor 2 not to talk or correspond with her neighbor (neighbor 1).

Evidently my field visit and knowledge did not sink into neighbor 1, and then the officer told (neighbor 1) that he could extend the fence, and if the second neighbor disagreed, and had a survey to prove he was wrong, then he would have to fix the problem, after the fact.

I feel the officer is wrong when he did not recommend getting a property survey performed prior to any fence built, as that is what fence company's require too.

My next step is to inform neighbor 1 that I will not be preparing a proposal for him, since he did not value my recommendations or knowledge during my preliminary field visit. I personally do not want to work for a client that acts in this manner.

Any comments or thoughts to this?

More fun!!!

Upon calling neighbor 1 (during break) to inform him I will not be preparing a proposal for him, he hung up the phone on me. When I called him back, he raised his voice and threatened to call the police on me too!

Furthermore I have begun communication with the Fremont Police Department to set up a meeting so I can educate the police department pertaining fence lines relative to boundary lines. Officers should recommend hiring a Professional Land Surveyor and not give advice to their residents pertaining fence extensions if there is a boundary dispute.

I simply would not have called neighbor 1 back. If he didn't value your previous advice, he probably wouldn't have called you either.

Good luck with your meeting with the police. Hopefully something productive might come from it.

kwilson wrote:Keith

And another thing, if there are rosebushes involved, add $100.

Don't you mean $100- per rose bush Ken?

I am on the CLSA Public Awareness Committee with the Board, so this is good practice to communicate with a police department in educating them about land surveying. Everyone needs education on what we really do.

Greg Sebourn wrote:Keith,
You may want to bring some other people along from the local chapter to help add to the knowledge-base when the brass start asking questions.

Also, if they are receptive to your comments in the meeting, ask if you could provide a couple of training sessions for their officers.

Greg, as I am on the Public Awareness Committee, it is best to keep it simple. There are examples from others who have educated other police departments and with the CLSA pamphlet "Right of Entry for Land Surveyors" this can be done in one easy meeting.

I thought the idea of bringing another person along a great idea. But because Keith is on the PAC he probably has all the answers to any questions or comments that anyone would have regarding this situation.

Keith, Good Luck.

As I am now consulting with neighbor 2, I received a call from her stating that another surveyor was out surveying for neighbor 1, and when she came home last night, the rose bushes were removed, and her irrigation was torn up too!

I will be looking for the points and tags set by the unknown surveyor to follow up and work with neighbor 2. Evidently when the Fremont Police Department was originally out, they said that nothing shall be done yet, but neighbor 1 doesn't understand. Neighbor 2 now has a vandalism complaint due to the removal and damage to her roses and irrigation.

Luckily neighbor 2 took pictures and video of the roses before they were removed.

Any thoughts/comments?

Started with neighbor 1 (although no contract, no real work, just pre-consult). Now working with neighbor 2. Neighbors are/have been fighting. Police have been involved. Legal action likely. Hmmmmm...

Tread lightly. Better yet, refer it to someone who has had no involvement up to this point, then walk away.

Neighbor 1 has already shown a capacity to act irrationally and confrontationally. Even if there is nothing to make it stick, that one might put in a complaint to BPELS for conflict of interest (or who knows what else) saying "He was my surveyor before he was her surveyor!"

Yes, you would eventually come out OK, but it still takes time, places a potential cloud over your license while being investigated, and is generally inconvenient. Not worth the trouble.

Be sure to include T&M fees for any court time, as thats probably where this will go.

The police are reactionary and when it comes to land issues vastly uninformed. I handed a copy of the right of entry to a Irvine cop once - he glanced at it and said "Thats for the courts to decide." Not only didn't he know - he didn't want to know.

Sounds like Don and Keith should have a meeting so Keith can then explain it to his client. Good luck guys.

And yet another interesting thing about this is I am positive "neighbor 2" (who had his rose bushes removed) was my college roommate (who is not a surveyor) who asked me about this while I was on vacation and I was unable to get back to him until all the poop had already hit the fan. Same details as this, and lives in Fremont.

I am confused how this would be a corner record of the lines are deeded lines after subdivision, but either way sounds like there is not really a question on the actual resolution.

The property line between Neighbor 1 and Neighbor 2...was that a deed line? Or was it shown on the subdivision map?

What good information was represented to the client?

In an effort to provide peer review and help avoid future repercussions, have you considered how B&P Code, Section 8762(b)(1-5) would apply to how you have represented the common boundary to the client, the client's neighbor or any of their representatives?

I'm a little confused. You are showing the chiseled marks as witness points to the old (and now meaningless) lot corners, but telling the property owner that the marks properly mark his boundary?

You can't have it both ways. Are you indicating a property boundary to your client or not? If so, is that line one described in a deed but not shown on any record map? It seems that both of those are true.


I don't see how you can get around the RS. The cost of filing the map is immaterial with regard to following the law. "I'm sorry BPELS, but it's just too expensive to do what the PLS Act says" and putting the blame on the County fees just won't work.


Edit: Ric, the BPELS PLS consultant just gave you a subtle hint saying what I said more bluntly. Save yourself the problems and file the map before you end up being being mandated to do so anyway.

Don you may be on the hook because before I read any of this I had told my old roomie to look for tags on the sidewalk, so you may get a call on that one. I had asked to get the license # so I could look up who the surveyor was.

Aside from that it is a good argument for revised standards for CRs. In this example it sounds like the resolution is very basic and the deed line requirement trips you up. In reality, if the original crosses are in and it is merely a matter of simple offsets as in this case it would be nice to make things a corner record in this example.

If I was surveying all of Lot x and the westerly 12 feet of Lot Y and found some chisled marks on the westerly line of the westerly 12 feet of Lot Y, told the client this is your pl, then filed a CR with the county showing these chisled x's to be 12 feet from the the common line of Lot X and Y, there would be h--- h--- to pay.

Also, I am just wondering how I would along the Westerly line of the westerly 12 feet of Lot Y, set or find something, tell the landowner this is his pl, and not have to file something for the rears. Maybe the CR will suffice?????????

If you can get away with not filing the RS, go for it, but there may be a price to pay later on. And I don't think that "Well, the county surveyor said that I didn't have to file a RS" is going to be worth the cost of the chisel used to make those marks in the curb.

Good luck to both of you, and one of you is gonna need it more than the other.

PS: I don't know if I would tell my client to tell his neighbor to move his stuff. "I hope you guys can work this thing out. At least now you know where the deed/property line is." Just cause it is over the line, don't mean it has to be moved by anybody just yet.

I am in need of more work, but I am sooooooo glaaaaad that I didn't get this survey. Too far to travel anyway, although on any given day?????

Looks like Don traveled quite far and happened to underbid Keith, who lives about 10 miles north of there. I was surprised to see who did the surveying on that one.

First off I want to say how pleasantly surprised I was Thursday to receive a call from Don informing me that he was the other surveyor, and I commend Don for standing up and responding to this post, and calling me. As Brian said, I was in the works to discover who the 2nd surveyor was, since the survey truck had no signs, but a license plate was retrieved (from the neighbor that wasn't home, lol). Thanks for the call Don!

We talked some time and I would probably have to agree with the intent and findings of the chiseled crosses. As for a CR verses a ROS, Alameda County accepts a CR showing points of deed as a reference point to the original lot on a map. The deed is described as "Lot 18 and the northwestern 4 feet of lot 17, and southeastern 13 feet of lots 19, 20, and 21 . . . ", bottom line I probably would have also filed a CR, unless I found material discrepancy.

Hey Brian, I'm only 3.5 miles away, lol.

On another note, this incident has opened up communications with the Fremont Police Department Traiining Unit. As I am on the Public Relations Committee for CLSA, I've talked to the Sergent and he has offered the opportunity for me to address all officers at thier briefing before leaving the station in the near future.

The County condones circumventing the PLSA?


Wow.

I look at it from multiple sides, public and private.

1) As I am responsible for reviewing maps for a bay area county, when surveyors submit a CR showing reference points to a line shown on a record map, how is that wrong? Haven't you ever set a 1' or 2' offset to a corner because a retaining wall or tree is online? What is the difference if the point is 13'?

2) Yes the deed line is not on a map of record, rather references lots of record.

3) When knowingly there is a boundary dispute, a record of survey gives constructive notice, stronger than a corner record, if the boundary dispute goes to court.

4) When bidding a job, most want to keep it as cheap as possible so they get the job, no matter how far one travels. (sorry, I want to make money on my jobs).

5) A licensed surveyor is signing the document, and putting their license on the line, if others disagree with the approach taken.

All in all, the Business and Professions Code is not perfect, and some revisions could be made, but we work with what we have, even if we agree or disagree. At least a CR is filed, compared to how many times a surveyor doesn't file anything.

comes up because of the lack of filing the RS, great.

It really isn't the offset points that were found or set, it is THE LINE that is being surveyed that is really the issue, aside from what local practice is regarding the CR vs RS filing.

In my brain section 8762(b)(5) is a tough one to get around, I don't care what kind of "offset monuments" are found or set.

It sounds like the CS is on the side of Surveyor 2. Sounds like Surveyor 1 is okay with it also. Just better hope that there isn't some other cat out there who has a bone to pick, cause this one sounds like something to chew on.

Either way the real harm is really nothing to do with CR versus ROS in this case. It is how the neighbor wants to deal with the planting area in the first place and his destructive nature in resolving it - which has nothing to do with that issue.

I'm with Bruce on this.

What do the "offset" points represent? If they are just offsets to an existent corner, fine, file a CR. But in this case, they are offsets to no longer existent corners, secondarily. Primarily, they are points marking existing property lines. Those lines do not show on any record maps. If you are to be in conformance with the EXPLICIT TEXT AND INTENT of state law, you MUST file an RS per §8762(b)(5).

IM(ns)HO, this exactly the type of practice that so many who try to practice within the law complain about. That is those who quote a price predicated on being able to circumvent the extra expense of filing the appropriate map.

Surveyor A looks at the project, thinks "Deed lines not shown on any record map. Gotta file an RS. 4 hrs research (subject and adjoiner deeds, all pertinent maps and CRs, CL ties,...), 8 hrs field (maybe there are encroachment issues to locate, have to search a while for existing monumentation), 8 hrs draw map & respond to review comments, $500 review fee. $2500."

Surveyor B looks at it and says "Slam dunk. Copy of subdivision map, put the offsets where the deed says, maybe a CR. Grab copy of map on way to job, 1 hour, get deed from client, slam in 4 points, 4 hours including travel, call it good, maybe file a CR if client asks, 2 hours. $495."

Why in the world would a prospective client pay Surveyor A $2500, when Surveyor B will do the "same thing" for way less than half?


Deed Parcel - Previous Record Map = File an RS!

I agree Evan, that is what is required, and I lose jobs all the time this way.

But if ROS fees are going to keep going up this type of scenario will not go away. I just submitted an ROS in Napa County. It was a $1500 mapcheck fee.

And I agree that mapcheck fees in some counties are outrageously high, but that is a different issue. Unfortunately that issue does affect this one for some, but the abuse of map check in some jurisdictions does not justify not following the law by others.

If your review fees are ridiculously high, get your clients to send their complaints to the BOS and their state representatives.