ALTA Survey-Any Accountability?

[rpost]

I apologize ahead of time for the long winded post.

I make my living performing ALTA surveys. Occasionally one of my clients uses the sellers ALTA in lieu of hiring me to save some money. One particular client is in the habit of asking me to review the provided survey to see if it is up to par, a service that I provide them free of charge to keep the relationship strong.

Recently i reviewed a survey that in my opinion was severely lacking. In this instance I had several comments that I provided my client by referencing the 2005 standards to the deficiencies in the survey. One of my comments was that the procedure of survey seemed to be lacking. It was one of those hold two centerline monuments away from the site and calc the boundary record jobs. I asked that the surveyor show more precisely his boundary resolution. Unfortunately, to my surprise and dismay he addressed most of my comments but stated that his entire procedure was shown.

After a second look and consulting with two other LS's I warned my client that the property line determination seemed a bit shaky. As a result, our firm was commissioned to perform a second ALTA on the property, especially since there is a building on property line +/-.

Upon doing the proper research and now a portion of the field work I have determined that the sellers surveyor ignored several important boundary determining monuments, like all of them. I now consider the survey to be negligent. In fact one of the monuments (three in total) that was used for the basis of bearings was clearly disturbed (bent). When I initially held the monument, a record, found monument on the subdivision boundary and right of way was 0.4' off ROW. It turns out it actually fits when the bent pipe is tossed out.

My question is, since I believe an ALTA to require a full boundary survey, is there any agency that holds surveyors accountable to certifying deficient ALTA's. The surveyor certified that it meets the standards, however in my opinion it is clearly lacking. I know there are standards, but is there any accountability other than being sued later?

[Stephen Johnson]

State Board does.

If he was negligent in his boundary resolution, it does not matter whether or not it is an ALTA. They can also hit him for other stuff under the ALTA standards because that standard was what he certified to.

[Jim Frame]

Complete your ALTA. When you file your ROS, show the differences in boundary location between your survey and that of the other surveyor's ALTA. Provide a copy of his ALTA to the County Surveyor for reference. Once your ROS is filed, send copies of everything to your local JPPC and/or the BPELS Enforcement Unit.

.

[E_Page]

I agree. If your goal is to attempt to educate the other surveyor, once you've completed your project (ALTA and RS), provide copies of everything you have to your local PPC. That is the better first option.

If you have already dealt directly with the other surveyor and found him to be too obstinate to be educated, go straight to BPELS.

[rpost]

I appreciate the advice. You probably wouldn't be surprised if I told you that several ALTA's come across my desk with similar issues. I still have yet to see one that another surveyor prepared and filed a Record of Survey. Not one. I feel like there are so many surveyors skating around the law or just ignorant to it that it would be quite the task to correct them. Also, it is just plain frustrating.

[land butcher]

In the mid 80s when went from OC to the central coast I was surprised that they filed RSs when doing a ALTA.
The reason was the records, many RE offices used the maps for sales and they were good advertising paid by the previous client.

The downside, as I was told by a now deceased prominent surveyor, was the possibility that a county surveyor could determine that he didn't like your survey resolution and then your RS would conflict with the ALTA used in a sale completed months earlier, or have your RS filed under protest which is not good either.

[E_Page]

The CS has no authority to have you alter your boundary resolution.

[Jim Frame]

"The downside, as I was told by a now deceased prominent surveyor, was the possibility that a county surveyor could determine that he didn't like your survey resolution and then your RS would conflict with the ALTA used in a sale completed months earlier, or have your RS filed under protest which is not good either."

Those are just two of the many excuses used by ALTA mills to justify not filing. The most popular one is that filing a ROS is too expensive, meaning that their clients won't pay for it and/or they'll lose the work to another surveyor who won't file.

I know of two firms in my area that turn out hundreds of ALTAs a year between them, with ROS filed on a mere handful. I'd like to see BPELS undertake a very public and concerted effort to clean up the ALTA industry. Until there's a credible threat of expensive repercussions to the practice of ignoring §8762 for ALTA surveys, the big players aren't going to change their ways.

.

[rpost]

I always file my ROS when required. That being said, the fees that most counties charge (Orange excepted, kudos to them) are highway robbery! I digress.

Update. The difference in my boundary resolution resulted in +/- 0.10 differences in the lot corner locations. Not a huge discrepancy, but none the less I "surveyed" the property.

Unfortunately for our profession/fortunately for my firm, I found a major encroachment not shown in the survey. Fortunate for me, my client now relies solely on my firm for their ALTA Surveys. Unfortunate because I honestly feel like this gentleman has let us all down. How can we gain ground within our profession if some of our peers produce negligent surveys? Should it really require a second surveyor to review a finished product to find major issues?

I found that a bordering property (fast food restaurant) has their drive thru +/- 9' on our property. These improvements were not shown on the discussed survey.

The funny thing is that I discovered this by using the other surveyor's ALTA to aid in determining which portion of the parking lot I needed to show. His crew didn't pick these encroachments up.

I am going to call him directly tomorrow as a professional courtesy, but it will no doubt be an uncomfortable call. I do feel silly informing my client that one of my peers did not hold up to their end of the bargain.
.

[Ben Lund]

I guess I was always under the impression that you are found negligent because of procedure not because of results. On the other hand, if the negligent procedure doesn’t create resulting damages what sort of liability does the surveyor incure?

[T. S. Higgins]

If poor procedure gives correct results, then you opened yourself up for liability, but there is no damage upon which to be found liable, in my understanding.

Negligence would require both poor procedure and poor results to result in legal action, though consistently poor procedure regardless of results certainly could end up with Board action taken against you.

[E_Page]

I guess I was always under the impression that you are found negligent because of procedure not because of results. On the other hand, if the negligent procedure doesn’t create resulting damages what sort of liability does the surveyor incure?

If the results are incorrect, that is a demonstration of negligence. If all other procedures were correct, but the surveyor simply failed to show something, like an encroachment, that is a failure of QC, one of the final steps in the procedure of producing and providing documentation of the survey.

The damage in a case like this isn't that the client relied on the survey in the decision for other expenditures, but that time was wasted and the client had to hire someone else to perform another survey. So what was the time worth and what was the cost of the survey? Inasmuch as these are quantifiable, there's the damage.

It could be argued by the negligent surveyor that the client could have allowed him the opportunity to correct his survey before hiring another to do a new one and thereby avoid the portion of damages representing the cost of the survey. Either way, that surveyor loses credibility and potential future business, and the profession suffers some amount in reputation.


Back to negligence: If a RS was required by law but the surveyor did not file one, even if his ALTA was technically perfect and the client suffered no damage, he has neglected to follow the law. This is a negligent act in itself. I suppose the idea there is that the public suffers some damage in the lack of public record of the survey.

Where's Woolley? He can probably speak better to this topic than I can.

[Jim Frame]

"If a RS was required by law but the surveyor did not file one, even if his ALTA was technically perfect and the client suffered no damage, he has neglected to follow the law. This is a negligent act in itself."

It could be negligence, incompetence or fraud. In my experience, it's mostly fraud in the form of a willful failure to comply with statutory requirements in order to gain a financial advantage.

.

[land butcher]

The CS has no authority to have you alter your boundary resolution.

ROTFLMAO...........

quote
a county surveyor could determine that he didn't like your survey resolution and then your RS would conflict with the ALTA used in a sale completed months earlier, or have your RS filed under protest which is not good either.
unquote

[land butcher]

I know of a lot and block tract in OC where at least in one block the original surveyors set all the corners record distance from one end and put all the error in the last lot.
The County Surveyor did their own survey of the whole block locating all PL fences and verified that that was what the original surveyors did and allowed RS's to be filed under that determination.

Some years later the County surveyor changed his position and REQUIRED that the block be prorated. This moved our lot almost a foot.

Really ugly.

[E_Page]

I know of a lot and block tract in OC where at least in one block the original surveyors set all the corners record distance from one end and put all the error in the last lot.
The County Surveyor did their own survey of the whole block locating all PL fences and verified that that was what the original surveyors did and allowed RS's to be filed under that determination.

Some years later the County surveyor changed his position and REQUIRED that the block be prorated. This moved our lot almost a foot.

Really ugly.

The CS is free to come up with any boundary resolution he thinks appropriate as long as he adheres to the appropriate standard of care and procedures. Any other licensed surveyor who likewise adheres to the appropriate standard of care may legitimately arrive at different conclusions and is not "required" under any law to agree with the CS.

Further, the CS has no authority to "require" you to accept or adhere to any particular methodology. The law is very specific on that point. He may add a note of disagreement, but if you've done your job well and documented it thoroughly, the CS should either be convinced of the validity of your results, or risk looking quite foolish by adding a note of disagreement.

If you alter your results to please the CS, even though said result is contrary to evidence you found and to your professional judgment, you are abdicating your professional responsibility and possibly helping to perpetuate a fraud on the landowners.

[land butcher]

Whatever.

I look forward to the day you have to justify your RS in a court of law that the County Surveyor put a note on that he does not agree with your conclusions.

Be sure and have the name and number of your E&O carrier along.

[dmi]

Can you elaborate on your point. Do you have case law that states an opinion one way or another that a private surveyor who is at odds with a country surveyor is somehow in the wrong? What is your point exactly?

[land butcher]

No.

You guys just continue on in your opinion that you are always right and the courts will always rule on "right".

[dmi]

I am seriously interested in your opinion;otherwise, I would not have asked.
I happen to think that a private practice surveyor might be in considerable trouble if the situation can only be resolved by the CS placing a note on the RS. I thought you might have additional thoughts to add to the topic.

I was not trying to be argumentative, so I hope you will share your thoughts,even if you do so privately.

Thanks for your help

[land butcher]

Thats my point.
And lets face it, a court is going to give more credence to THEIR county surveyor than some "fly-by-night" private surveyor.

In the case I cited above in the 60s the CS agreed that the original surveyors put all the error in the last lot. We come along in the late 70s base our map and plans on that data only to find out after first submittal that the currrent CS INSISTED that the lots be prorated.
So, had you sent a ALTA to your client and the deal closed, as it takes weeks to get a check print back from the CS, you, as the lowly private surveyor, would be in the hot seat. A govt agency that changed it's mind and has ZERO liability and a owner that doesn't know you finds his property just moved over a half foot. UGLY.

I constantly had issues with one CS office on RS's, mostly superficial stuff though, because no one in the CS office was a surveyor and had limited, if any, experience in boundary analysis. SCARY.

At least with our lot project it was a design/const but we still had to change our plans and show one fence staying and wall .5ft away and another fence being torn down that was off the property per the previous surveys.

If ALTA's were not such last minute rush deals and your RS could go thru first check, with the CS knowing that it was part of a ALTA and reviewed by more than a entry level checker, It would not be such a issue.

Another item, I did the field work on a lot survey for a ex county map checker, I had surveyed the adjoining lot. I was amazed at the history that surveyor gave me that I had never seen doing my research. Their response was "I know where to look for stuff not readily available to outside surveyors". To my relief there was nothing there that would have changed my boundary determination.

[land butcher]

Surveyors have always been the necessary evil step child of engineering firms even though in most firms the survey dept has the highest profit/project.

Sometimes we have to reduce our income to do what we think is right.

I split with one long time engr due to his refusal to add RS costs to the developer. They were/are buying old houses that sit on 2 lots for ~$600k and building 2 - 2story homes and selling them for $900k and up each, with no offsite improvement costs. I'll let you do the math, I have already done it and a RS would hardly effect the profit margin. Existing property corners are not in place.

But, of course, everything he could come up with to increase his fees was necessary.

[Ben Lund]

Thanks Dave for clearing some things up for me. I guess I’ve looked at it as a distinction between Civil vs Criminal. Damages can be proven and awarded in a civil case and can be quite extensive. This thread has discussed the “Found two monument, fit record” ALTA as well as ALTA that have missed encroachments.

If the surveyor did not file a Record of Survey he/she is guilty of negligence per se and that negligence is then assumed. Any damages resulting from the ALTA would most likely be awarded. The damages might be the cost to remove and rebuild a wall or something more extreme like buying the land at the potential developed value because the ALTA showed it was a legal lot but it really isn’t. If there are no civil damages then there is only criminal. Am I on the right track here?

You mentioned damages to the public. To me this seems like a criminal act and although there are fines/punishments, these repercussions are not necessarily a function of civil damages but relate to punishments affixed to the crime. These punishments seem to include revocation of license, statutory fines, repayment of crime investigation, etc. Am I understanding this correctly?

[Stephen Johnson]

I know of a lot and block tract in OC where at least in one block the original surveyors set all the corners record distance from one end and put all the error in the last lot.
The County Surveyor did their own survey of the whole block locating all PL fences and verified that that was what the original surveyors did and allowed RS's to be filed under that determination.

Some years later the County surveyor changed his position and REQUIRED that the block be prorated. This moved our lot almost a foot.

Really ugly.

Really Stupid too. Original surveyors are right even when they are wrong.

CS should know that. NO way can he require proration.

[E_Page]

Really Stupid too. Original surveyors are right even when they are wrong.

CS should know that. NO way can he require proration.

Exactly my point. Thanks, Stephen. I can't imagine a CS (none that I've met anyway) who are so unskilled and unknowledgeable in their profession so as to attempt to require proration over verifiable evidence of the original lines.

If I did run across such a CS, and he did attempt to require me to alter my results, contrary to my well considered opinion to a method resulting in locations I disagreed with, I would have the integrity to hold to my opinion and employ the statement "file as is".

Jim Frame said it in the expiration date thread, ask the CS for his proposed language for a note of disagreement. If it's a case of the CS attempting to force a prorated solution over found original or other reliable evidence of the original line locations, I do not fear having to defend my solution. I pity and question the qualifications of the surveyor who does.

Having said that, I have very open communications with my local CS. If he thinks I missed something, he isn't shy of bringing it to my attention. Neither is he an arrogant type who will attempt to dictate to me or any other surveyor in the county. There is a good deal of mutual respect so the likelihood of a note of disagreement ever appearing on one of my RSs is almost nil.

Occasionally, an unlicensed map checker will bring up what they think is an issue. The map checkers in my county are pretty reasonable and intelligent poeple as well. In that case, I first attempt to resolve any issues with the map checker. One of our map checkers is a living encyclopedia of survey history in the county, and as such, every once in a great while, has some bit of info from some obscure source or memory of what happened that I decide to incorporate into my solution. If, and this is fairly rare, I can't resolve with the checker, we get the CS involved. If the issue you are having is with an unlicensed map checker, and you haven't gone over his head top the CS or at least to another licensed person in the CS office before altering your results, then perhaps you should just give your license to the map checker.

If you don't have such a relationship with your CS, choose not to communicate or discuss an issue, and you don't have confidence in your nalytical abilities or ability to communicate, I can see why you would roll over and capitulate without any attempt at reason and thereby toss out professional integrity. If that describes you, you should be working under someone else's license.

You can roll on the floor and laugh your tail off if you like, LB. I have more respect for the profession and for my license than to be able to take that attitude. I also have to much respect for each to issue a boundary opinion under my license that I believe to be incorrect.