I have been doing a lot of re-plat's as of late.

I recently ran into an issue in which my client's title company has refused to prepare new deeds based on there being no transaction and then referred him to a deed preparation company, stating that it is to much liability.

Huh?

Now I am the first to shirk any sort of liability but this one has me confused.

I have always been under the impression that is what they do. So if this is what they do then what is the issue?

What exactly is happening out there that companies get to dump what they do on others to avoid the liability?

This brings me to a worry spot.

I have met several surveyors throughout time that seem to think absorbing liability is a good idea.

Just today I was on the phone with a colleague that was telling me how he was stuck re-designing a parking lot because the engineer tossed some grades.

I have little understanding of this sort of thinking.

Personally I would have sent it back to the engineer with some as-built shots and told him to fix it. I would have then requested a PO from my client for the new calc's I would have to do as an extra and then billed out today as an extra because the engineer wasted my time by messing things up and then suggested to my client that he back charge the engineer for my extra and wasted time.

I am wondering if this is why I don't do a lot of staking??? Huh?

So back to the deed prep thing. I am wondering if surveyors will start doing more of it even if they are not qualified to do so?? I certainly hope not.

I was on the phone with my insurance agent today. I am renewing my E&O and I once again had to remind her that I not, never have been nor will I ever be a design professional and I in no way should have to be associated with them nor have to absorb any sort of premium that has anything to do with that topic.

I wrote recently about the surveyors need to re-take our identity.

I am going to be writing a lot this year about that and also how we need to cut our liability. Those 2 things are an absolute must for all of us.

Liability surveyors!! Lets all cut back on it the un-required and double our protection on the required.

Make it a great week.

One of the most important things I learned in John Rose's surveying class is the definition of a monument.

"Set at or near a property corner".

Now this is also one of my favorites and maybe the most important.

"A boundary is defined on paper".

I love this stuff. I love recorded plats because that's what they are. Recorded, a legal document that has permanently defined a property boundary.

Who can define a boundary in Arizona? If you said a surveyor then you are wrong!!!!! Only a court of law can do this.

Yes there are platting exceptions but all municipalities have a legal department.

All that said brings me to my point.

I have been running across a lot of cad files lately in which the surveyor has gone out in a platted subdivision, recovered the monuments, drew a line between them and called this the boundary and given it to the architect and civil for design.

I understand this method, however in the case of a platted subdivision I fully disagree with it, unless there is a serious blunder, which we all have found at one time or another.

I am of the opinion that a monument does not define a boundary, but simply represents a controlling location that is subjective depending on who surveys it.

Going back to the find and trace method. In the case of a platted subdivision, once again in my opinion is fundamentally incorrect based on the fact that 5 guys can go out, shoot the same monuments and come up with a different boundary. Before you know you have people arguing that the perfectly good plat is somehow messed up because the monuments measure different.

Whatever!

Why go to all that trouble when there is a perfectly good legal boundary? How about simply hopping on a meridian and use some good old surveyor common sense and use best fit and make sure that no one loses?
Call out a falling on a monument you don't like it.

Now there are some that will argue this point and say monuments are the end all of the universe and that's fine, however in my mind it's mute. 

Why do surveyors want to take all kinds of liability when all they have to to do is provide evidence? That's what I am. I am a professional evidence producer. Do I want to re-create the world of a platted lot? Oh hell no!!!

I am speaking from the perspective that the cad files I recently received were in a platted subdivision, there were only topo's done and no results of survey filed and in a couple of recent instances I have had to re-do the boundary for some legals I had to write based on the fact that the particular city that everything was going to would have kicked it out, hence causing some changes to the design.

So you're out doing a topo, you've gotten your meridian and you miss a rebar and cap. So What!! It's just a representation of what some other guy did and who knows what the crew chief did.

Now getting into boundary surveys is another thing and I use many methods for those. Record and measured and falling's being my first choice in a platted subdivision. That's why we file results of surveys because it is the result of the evidence we produced and yes I know that there are applications for different types of surveys but today is about the plat map.

I have done it all different ways but I always fall back on the fundamentals learned from John Rose and many old timey guys, especially in a platted subdivision.

" A MONUMENT IS SET AT OR NEAR A PROPERTY CORNER" 
"A PROPERTY CORNER IS DEFINED ON PAPER"

Brilliant, just amazingly brilliant!!! Got to love the old guy common sense. 

I think Boundary Control and Legal Principals I & II should be a mandatory requirement for anyone that is allowed to even trace a boundary line.

Employers call Phoenix College and immediately enroll your people. I used to send selected people through myself included and it was some of the best money I ever spent.

Peace out surveyors, make a great common sense filled week.

I was recently hired to do a replat on 2 lots in a subdivision.

I did some prelim calc's and went out to do a search and destroy monument search.

I held a brass cap on the section line and the northwest corner of the section which was the corner of the subdivision as my meridian.

The distance checked 2' +/- short of record plat. This kind of irritated me because everything else was checking real nice.

This plat was done in the 80's and all evidence points to the section corner being accurate and in character.

I searched along the subdivision line and found nothing, nada, nill.

Unfortunately in order to reconstruct these lots establishing the subdivision line was completely required.

I pondered on it for a bit. I applied an index to the lots therefore shorting my 2 lots .6'. 

I had located a lot of the walls and the index gradually caused some major encroachments so I threw that idea out the window.

I finally decided to calc the lots at record and hold the brass cap that I found on the section line and the walls fell perfect. 

I forgot to mention that the brass cap checked great to the west 1/4 corner and the interior brass caps and property corners that I recovered.

So now we have a 30 year old plat with a bad distance. Why?

Some guy from way back made a typo and I will stand behind that statement. 

Why? Because I've done it and so has anyone that has ever drawn a survey.

This boys and girls is the reason we check things in the field and use our awesome data base to verify.

I love boundary stuff that makes me think. It's truly the one thing about surveying that I like to sink my teeth into.

Make it a great week surveyors.