Touchy Subject

PLS7393 · Post by **PLS7393** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 1:47 pm

How many incidences of finding an undocumented point by the same surveyor would you accept before filing a complaint against a licensed surveyor? I've come across two different sites with undocumented tags already. When I inquired about filed maps at one county, they say this individual has numerous maps never finalized, but they don't file any complaints.

It appears that this individual is low balling other surveyors and not filing documents. During my proposal stages, I've been told by homeowners that they have an estimate from a surveyor from ###### (not in the bay area), and this fits information from this same surveyor.

This surveyor has participated on this site in the past.

The local CLSA Chapter has a JPPC.

land butcher · Post by **land butcher** » Sat Sep 21, 2013 4:56 pm

Jim Frame · Post by **Jim Frame** » Sun Sep 22, 2013 6:31 am

I'd gather what evidence you have and take it to the JPPC. That's what it's there for.

dmi · Post by **dmi** » Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:22 am

I would first try to contact the surveyor. Professional courtesy ought to be extended.

MFORD · Post by **MFORD** » Sun Sep 22, 2013 9:28 am

Keith,
Land Butcher has the right answer. We have to be self policing. Every LS has occasionally not filed maps or corner records, either by circumstance or oversight. Usually contacting the surveyor solves the problem and he/she deserves that courtesy. You present a different scenario. If the circumstances are as you say, this person doesnâ€™t deserve the professional courtesy because he/she isnâ€™t acting professionally. File a complaint with the JPPC. He/she may not respond and if so hopefully the JPPC will file a complaint with the Board. In my experience a letter from the Board does get their attention. We have to be self policing.

At the risk of sounding like a one trick pony, consider what was going on 25 years ago with many surveyors. They routinely didnâ€™t file maps for a variety of excuses (not reasons) including copy right concerns for their clients and their interpretation of the PLS Act didnâ€™t require them to. No one called them to task. This goes to the core of why we need the â€œUnrecorded Maps Legislationâ€ currently being reviewed by the Leg Com. If these people are allowed to continue unabated it will be back to the future for surveying.

land butcher · Post by **land butcher** » Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:15 pm

No quarter.
We have laws/rules for a number of reasons and one of the main ones to me is it levels the playing field dollar wise.
If laws/rules are not enforced upon one, then the law/rule becomes null and void for all.

pls7809 · Post by **pls7809** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:24 am

Turning him in for the ones you know about may be what he needs to get him to file the records and result in little or no penalty to him, if he responds to the Board and files the records.

desert turtoise · Post by **desert turtoise** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 2:46 pm

In my county, one old CE (still practicing part-time, I am told), is known to have a long history of monumenting the first or parent parcel map. The following parcel map splits of that map are typically not monumented.

Every surveyor in the county who makes cost estimates for re-tracing his later splits know that only the perimeter of the first PM is likely to be in place.

PLS7393 · Post by **PLS7393** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 3:02 pm

Nothing personal Desert, but I'm not looking for other stories here.
Please do not hijack my thread as I am looking for valid communication on a touchy subject.

If you have a scenerio or a similar topic, maybe you should contact your local JPPC.

Thank you.

pls7809 · Post by **pls7809** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 3:03 pm

Parcel map monumentation requirements are defined by the local agency which approves the PM. Some local agencies don't require interior monuments to be set. Some agencies still allow the "Record Data" PM which, IMO, is a travesty. The local agency should be inspecting the monuments when they are required.

PLS7393 · Post by **PLS7393** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 3:07 pm

Thanks Ryan, but please read my post above.

Thank you.

pls7809 · Post by **pls7809** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 3:44 pm

Sorry I meant that to be a reply to Desert Tortoise.

desert turtoise · Post by **desert turtoise** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:06 pm

PLS7393 wrote:Nothing personal Desert, but I'm not looking for other stories here.
Please do not hijack my thread as I am looking for valid communication on a touchy subject.

If you have a scenerio or a similar topic, maybe you should contact your local JPPC.

Thank you.

You are right PLS 7393; sorry for taking your thread onto another tangent. Since the damage is done, please permit me to continue briefly on my tangent by saying;
I have presented before my local committee on matters regarding ethics; they have proved unwilling to be involved (other than agreeing with me verbally and unofficially) in promoting a certain aspect of professionalism: specifically regarding how or if a land surveyor should comment in his/her map regarding critical analysis of his/her fellow surveyors' surveying and mapping. In a public record, like a recorded map, lawyers call this libel. After one year, the statute of limitations runs out on pursuing someone for damages for libeling their fellow surveyors in their maps. The recorded document is forever, a testament to how some of us can be unprofessional to each other. We need to treat each other with respect.

Jim Frame · Post by **Jim Frame** » Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:30 pm

how or if a land surveyor should comment in his/her map regarding critical analysis of his/her fellow surveyors' surveying and mapping. In a public record, like a recorded map, lawyers call this libel.

Publishing a professional opinion about the location of a boundary that's not in agreement with another practioner's opinion isn't libel unless it can be shown conclusively that the expressed difference is malicious and counterfactual. I'd say that's a pretty rare circumstance, and one that would be extremely difficult to prove in the course of normal boundary surveying.
.

dewardkb · Post by **dewardkb** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 5:20 am

I agree with Jim Frame. Further in the course of presenting a professional opinion libel and slander are considered privileged by the Court in most cases.

Ric7308 · Post by **Ric7308** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 12:02 pm

Keith,

I would simply contact the other land surveyor and speak with him/her personally asking if they intend to file the appropriate maps. If you receive negative or not committal response, submit it to BPELSG. If the review agrees with your evaluation, the individual will be contacted about filing. Where it goes from there is HIGHLY dependent upon how the individual responds and prior issues, if any.

PLS7393 · Post by **PLS7393** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 3:40 pm

Ric,
That is exactly what I did. I sent an e-mail yesterday morning and he called me today. Wouldn't you know he thanked me for not turning him in to BPELS(G). At least I haven't yet, lol. Who would have guessed he had an excuse, but I'm not sure if it was not a valid excuse. Is getting sidetracked and not following through on a job a valid excuse, lol. Not in my professional opinion, but if I include that clause in my contract maybe I'm safe?

He continued to tell me he lost files, and working out of his van and laptop, hmmm, sounds pretty professional to me. I'll keep my eyes open on his follow through, but I'm a betting man and the odds tell me I'll be sending Sacramento a package in the near future.

No need to get the JPPC involved, if he doesn't respond to me, he sure is heck won't respond to a JPPC.

Now back to our regular scheduled program, or is that work? I need to revise my standard contract and include a clause on getting sidetracked. This forum is getting me sidetracked, lol.

desert turtoise · Post by **desert turtoise** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 4:26 pm

Jim Frame wrote:Publishing a professional opinion about the location of a boundary that's not in agreement with another practioner's opinion isn't libel unless it can be shown conclusively that the expressed difference is malicious and counterfactual. I'd say that's a pretty rare circumstance, and one that would be extremely difficult to prove in the course of normal boundary surveying.
.

Again, I apologize to Keith for taking the non-filing topic on this tangent.

What I am referring to is the direct calling out in a recorded map the name of another surveyor and stating that surveyor "fails to understand how to arrive at the correct boundary conclusion" or similar words to that exact effect.

How is that not a violation of Board Rule 476 (c) Representations (10)
"a licensee shall not falsely or maliciously injure or attempt to injure the reputation or business of others."

Jim Frame · Post by **Jim Frame** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:57 pm

What I am referring to is the direct calling out in a recorded map the name of another surveyor and stating that surveyor "fails to understand how to arrive at the correct boundary conclusion" or similar words to that exact effect.

That's a horse of a different color -- there's no valid reason to make a remark like that in public. It *might* have a place within the confines of a professional competency evaluation, but otherwise would constitute a breach of professional ethics.

desert turtoise · Post by **desert turtoise** » Tue Sep 24, 2013 8:24 pm

Thank you for your valuable input Jim Frame.

I have observed this to happen in depositions and trials but sometimes when no court action is involved.

A surveyor manufactures a new record map, possibly a repeat of an earlier map that he/she filed, but adds the degrading comments about the other surveyor.

Then the lawyer working with that surveyor has that malicious recorded map to hopefully score points in pre-trial as well as in court.

California Surveyors Forums

Touchy Subject

Touchy Subject

what does the surveyor say?

How about 40 years of not filing ?

Local JPPC

Board Rule 476 Code of Professional Conduct

On treating each other professionally