California Surveyors Forums

I stumbled upon this website while looking for some general information regarding Government Lots. I have my own opinion if this is defined as "surveying" pursuant to 8726 and was curious what others might think.

http://www.propertylinemaps.com/

"Our goal is to help you find property lines and find property corners by producing the most accurate GPS coordinates possible without hiring a surveyor. We do this by taking the information you supply and combining it with any online research we might do. That data is then processed by our own unique first-of-its-kind proprietary software.

Our goal is to produce coordinates that are within 30 feet of accurate on average."

Enough said.

Yes.

Lee Hixson wrote:"Our goal is to help you find property lines and find property corners by producing the most accurate GPS coordinates possible without hiring a surveyor. We do this by taking the information you supply and combining it with any online research we might do. That data is then processed by our own unique first-of-its-kind proprietary software.

Our goal is to produce coordinates that are within 30 feet of accurate on average."

Enough said.

In summation up: "Our goal is provide you with average 10 meter GPS accuaracy, circumventing state boundary surveying laws, in order to provide worthless POS information, while taking your money".

It's certainly at least aiding and abetting unlicensed practice. I hope Ric has the enforcement unit looking into it.

Since Joseph Elfelt has posted a Lot in Los Angeles as one of his examples, he has moved beyond the intent to violate laws to actual violation in CA.

If you go over to the About section, you get to read this nice little tidbit. Allow me to share:

"our proprietary software advances state-of-the-art by letting us process all this information, make any needed adjustments and supply you with property coordinates that are as accurate as possible without hiring a land surveyor.

But please keep one thing in mind. Joseph is not a land surveyor and the coordinates that you purchase from us and the maps displayed by those coordinates do not constitute a land survey. If what you really need is a survey then our service cannot help you and your only option is to pay the money and hire a licensed surveyor."

So, does "proprietary software" = GoogleEarth?

Contact information

Joseph Elfelt
20707 NE 120th St
Redmond, WA 98053 425-881-8017 West Coast time zone

Send Joseph an email

Questions: Do you have a question? Would you like a new feature? Did you find a program bug? Please send me an email and share your thoughts.

http://www.mappingsupport.com/p/gmap4_contact.html

Give him a break. According to Mr. Elfelt, he has "spent many years in the real estate field".

That explains how he learned to locate property lines. Any realtor worth his salt can do that! : )

Scalawags! String em up.

But seriously folks, as Mr. Page said " aiding and abetting".

To solicit that kind of garbage should be against the law to protect consumers. That quality of data is not even good enough to aid a middle school science project.

Has anyone formally complained to BPELSG or DCA or CLSA? If not, what is the suggested most effective method? Please let us know either way.

How about this site: http://www.ppmco.net

Would they be inviolation or are they just on the finges of practicing land surveying?

Quote: "Elevation points taken at key locations throughout a property to indicate elevation changes. Points are taken at finished floor, top/toe of slopes, building corners, steps, and on ground throughout property. Datum is NOT adjusted to sea level."

"All site plans created by Precision Property Measurement Ltd "PPM" are made exclusively for landscaping purposes (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §8727)."

In my opinion they would be in violatin of §8726(a) whether or not their datum is tied to sea level.

Or this site: http://www.fogcityasbuilts.com

Under their portfolio they show a site plan that has boundary lines from assessor's maps.

What do you think?

Well, I've been sporadically lurching on this site sense my retirement and have resisted the urge to chime in. However, I feel like commenting on this post (a great thread BTW).

This thread and others in the past have asked the question, "is this surveying?" when a non-licensed person is offering to provide some service where basically mapping of some sort or other is being offered. About 4-5 years ago when I was chair of the Legislative Committee we worked hard to overcome hurdels by other organizations to get a revision to the LSAct, Section 8726 passed, signed, and chaptered into law. That revision was the addition of subsection (n): (n) Renders a statement regarding the accuracy of maps or measured survey data.

In my opinion, from what I see advertised on these sites they are all claiming that they provide accurate products. Some even claim what that accuracy level is. The law was written to focus just on the rendering a statement of accuracy - not on any level of accuracy whether 1mm, 1cm, 1m, 1km, 100km, or any level. The determination of accuracy on maps and measured survey data is OUR job. This goes for GIS, as-builts, flood certificates, anything, etc.

I recommend filing a complaint with Ric and Ray at the board based upon subsection (n) along with other sections you think apply.

Just a thought -- These are the circumstances that were the reason for the revision put forward by the Leg. Comm and CLSA.

Back to retirement. :-))

The public is duped into believing they are getting a quality product, equal to a PLS or an RCE. Fraud.

A professional engineer or architect, unless he/she of course is also a hack, will want a stamp on that work product prior to commencement of design.

Fraud.

In this thread the vote is unanimous that the two companies mentioned are in fact offering land surveying services without the benefit of the required license to do so. These companies are using the “landscape exemptionâ€￾ as a way of skirting the licensure requirement. Unfortunately filing a complaint against these companies is ineffective. The process takes too long. I’m not criticizing BPELSG. They have to follow a process that can take years to complete and in the end the unlicensed offenders aren’t obliged to pay any attention. There is little BPELSG can do in the near term.

A better course of action would be to work towards getting the city and county departments to enforce current state codes and regulations. How many building departments require site plans be signed and stamped by a professional authorized to prepare the map? As Clark points out the CBC has definitive requirements for site plans submitted with building permit applications, as do the city and county departments. In every case the requirements necessitate the plans be prepared by a professional land surveyor, engineer or architect. If every planning and building department enforced the current regulations it would reduce the market for these companies.

Mike Ford

Thread on this company happening on another forum.


Company FAQ's state they don't work in California anymore.

"Lurching" Tom? That creates a rather humorous picture for me.



Mike,

Getting local building and planning departments on board to help shut outfits like this down may be effective in some jurisdictions, but certainly not all, and not consistently. Even in a single jurisdiction, it would require the constant training of staff to not accept any drawings without the proper stamp & signature, as well as training and re-training, and re-re-training as to what projects require stamps and which professionals may stamp which types of projects, and what type of DYI projects are exempt and which aren't, ....

In one local jurisdiction, the development services department had been told several times by individual practitioners and by a local design professionals organization that certain types of work require stamp & signature by certain types of licensees and that certain identified local drawing providers had no such licensees on staff or even at the end of a phone and so were illegally providing mapping and design services. It was eventually pointed out that the development services department had been told several times and that they were knowingly accepting illegally prepared mapping and design products - aiding & abetting.

the reply was that the county is not the licensing cop and so had no responsibility to verify that mapping and design on minor projects was prepared by a licensee, and besides, a couple of those providers make really nice and readable maps. So nothing changed until the enforcement unit of BPELSG contacted one or two of these outfits. Now the biggest offender found a pre-82 who is willing to stamp & sign maps for a fee.

I've been told that problem is unenforceable by BPELSG unless someone is damaged by relying on the map or design and as a result of the civil suit, proof comes out that the licensee was not exercising adequate control to meet the requirements of responsible charge.

"What about the requirement that a licensee needs to be an owner or officer of the company?"

I still recall the sound of the crickets in the wake of that question.


In all fairness to the Board, if you are able to provide something that is clearly advertising for licensed services, they are pretty responsive to checking up on that and getting a cease and desist order out. But those are easy to verify by viewing the advertisement and so easy to address with a letter or call. Actual practice matters, I would imagine would take longer.

I did ask about what BPELSG would need to be provided to pursue an unlicensed practice case. The short answer is that you have to have clear documentation that they offered to provide, did provide for payment, and provided services without the involvement of an appropriate licensee. An executed contract, written report, invoice, maps or drawings - an open and shut case before BPELSG even sees it. They have very limited resources for investigation and so generally don't have the ability to send someone to a place of business to check out the complaint.

I made a complaint against a person providing engineering and surveying services in CA and another state. He had neither a LS or PE license, claimed to be certified in what sounds like a branch of engineering but in reality is not a licensed activity and for which there is only a private certification through it's "professional" society.

I knew he had been providing engineering and surveying services for many years. I knew that he provided these services in many instances to local government agencies (with the knowledge of the agencies - but "it's not out job to be the license cops" and he was the low bid), but I had no copies of work product or contract documents. He was clearly advertising on his web site for surveying and design services though.

After making the complaint, I found that his website had been changed so that all references to providing licensed services had been removed.

I don't know how effective that is in the long run, but BPELSG responded rather quickly to the extent that they could with the facts available to them.