California Surveyors Forums

reads...

Names of adjoining owners of platted lands according to current public records

Personally, I will not list names. I will however give APN numbers. An ALTA is not a public document and I believe that placing any name on the map that is not particular to the map is crossing a line and invasive.

The APN suffices to obtain a list of individuals and their addresses if they need to be contacted concerning items noted or shown on the map.

Not a bad way, but it does NOT meet the ALTA specifications and can leave you open to a suit based on those standards and specifications. It will meet state minimum standards in several states.

Also, anyone who cares to investigate can find the names of the entities that own the lands involved. It is of public record and does not require FOI request to obtain.

I for one am not too happy with the new ALTA standards.

>>>Also, anyone who cares to investigate can find the names of the entities that own the lands involved. It is of public record and does not require FOI request to obtain.<<<

Isn't that what the client is paying for? Why should they pay for a survey that doesn't have all the required information on it then pay someone else to look up said missing information? I don't get why putting a property owner's name on a ALTA is invasive. After all, it's all public information. Can anyone give a rationale?

Dave,

That is the point I was making.

Of course it is also my opinion that there is TOO MUCH personal information out there just for the perusing. Especially mine.

Stephen,

I agree there's too much personal info out there.

I was told a story about someone's son who was stopped in an airport because he forgot his ID. They took him in a back room for questioning. They knew every detail of where he had lived, when, and who his roommates were going back to college.

That's why I'm not too concerned if someone wants to know who owns what piece of land. We're so far down the road toward a total loss of privacy that's the least of our concerns.

Civil Code section 1213 states that the purchaser has constructive notice. A Surveyor working for folks involved in a purchase can dig that out for them and place those names on the map.

1213. Every conveyance of real property or an estate for years
therein acknowledged or proved and certified and recorded as
prescribed by law from the time it is filed with the recorder for
record is constructive notice of the contents thereof to subsequent
purchasers and mortgagees;...

I'm puzzled by the privacy concerns about owner names on ALTA surveys. The number of people who actually lay eyes on an ALTA is pretty darn small. It's not like the maps go into a central publicly-accessible Internet database, and even if they did the only people who'd bother to access it would surveyors. The incremental exposure is just about nil, so I have no trouble with the standard or complying with it.

.

It's a non-issue for me.

For 3 decades I've been ferreting out the names of adjoiners on ANY survey I do, ALTA or otherwise. It's part of the investigative process, a necessary part of the resolution of your boundary requires that you obtain the deeds of the neighbors to insure compatibility.

Many hundreds of times I've even called adjoiners to ask about their knowledge of corner markers, fences, old unrecorded surveys, etc. None of them have ever objected...because it's instantly obvious to them that I'm performing a legitimate function.

It's not invasive.

To me, that item is asking for an identifier, which the APN provides.

Once the ALTA committee rolled over to the attorneys requests to allow 'heirs, successors and assigns" to be added to the cert.. well, thats what happens when surveyors on a committee are wined and dined by insurance companies...

Another thing I have to say is that I have no need for these standards. I have always known how to prepare an ALTA that would be satisfactory to all parties involved in a transaction.

The standards came into being because of the low end work that the tradesmen surveyors were cranking out. The standards were written for them, not for me.

arrogant (adjective): Making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud.

.

Jim Frame wrote:arrogant (adjective): Making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud.

.

Yes and does not give a damn what you or the world thinks about me

redundant (adjective): Characterized by verbosity or unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas.

.

To me it's a typical govt and/or quazi govt knee-jerk solution to a problem caused by the incompetence of a few.

Example #1. The law requiring lawn mowers to automatically shut off when the handle is released. Check out the gardeners in your area, they ALL have the handle tied back.

Example #2. Around the 1900's there was a fire in a garment factory in New York that killed scores of workers. That caused our govt to create what is now a myriad of labor laws (not all being bad). But all the rules and regulations sent the garment industry to the 3rd world toilets. Then we allow them to import the products without tariffs. Just last week a garment factory fire in a 3rd world toilet killed over a 100 workers. the garments in the residue had tags JC Penny, Sears, Target, etc. So we have laws then allow countries and companies to send the same product here without adhering to our laws, making our laws useless.
We could require all companies sending products here to prove they adhere to out labor and pollution laws or tack tariffs on the products to make it too expensive to import from these sweatshops. Do we? No, but most other countries do.

Because there is so much information available on property interests (County Property Tax records, Zillow, etc.) it is common to assume that land ownership information is readily available, but accurate information is not so easily available, and it is vital for a professional land surveyor to beware of the pitfalls in attempting to determine “ownership” for any purpose related to the preparation of an ALTA survey.
Determining the name of the owner of property is not as easy as searching the public record for a single document that describes the land adjoining. I suggest that a title search is not a “snapshot”; it is a “film strip”. Here are my words of warning for the diligent land surveyor:
1. The public records are maintained by name and not by legal description. One cannot search public records without already knowing the name of the owner or the name of the prior owner.
2. There may be numerous owners, and the last recorded deed may not disclose that fact. The last deed may be executed by a party who held a fractional (1/2 or 1/100) interest, but the last recorded deed simply describes “Blackacre” and does not identify the fractional interest. Such an ownership calls for a title search back to a common owner of the entire and a search forward to ascertain the names of all owners. There may be several owners, each of whom acquired title by separate recorded instrument.
3. The adjoining land may have been recently subdivided and what appears to be a single parcel is actually multiple parcels and each parcel may now be owned by a different party.
4. Public records also include documents that do not contain a legal description.
5. Name spelling may vary. A party may come into ownership as J. T. Smith as to one interest and as John Thomas Smith as to another interest. Then that person transfers title as J. Thomas Smith. The diligent title searcher does not assume that three names identify the same person.
6. The title searcher may need to conduct several different searches to consider variations. Consider a party with the name “Elliott”. The diligent title searcher must consider the four variations in the spelling of that name and make four different searches.

Lacombe