California Surveyors Forums

Today was small lot survey day. Neighbor fight, what would we all do if everyone got along with their neighbors? Not a lot!!

Anyway.. during the control part of the survey the neighbor rolls up and asks for my card, which he gets, then makes it known he is an attorney.

After I swooned and fainted knowing that, I continue on. Finish the job, pack up and head for the ranch.

So now I have a bunch of emails from the attorney.. I answered one

Here's the emails, pretty good for a laugh in my opinion..

Dear Mr. Plutae, you were completing a land survey today (11/17/2013) at xxxx yyyyy Ave, Encino CA. I just have one quick question. Other than performing a basic boundary survey did you perform any other work? Thank you for your assistance.


What other work would I even contemplate to do?
Regards

Paul M Plutae LS 4722
818-415-4896 cell
818-242-8163 office


Thanks for your quick reply. A "licensed survey map shall be provided to show the drainage pattern" as contemplated by LADBS DOCUMENT NO.: P/BC 2011-057. (see attached). As the disagreement with my neighbor was not about the property line, but his intent of changing the existing drainage pattern. Thanks again,


Again thanks for your quick reply, I might not have been clear in my follow-up. I was wondering if you prepared a licensed survey map showing the existing drainage pattern. As the disagreement with my neighbor was not about the property line, but his intent of changing the existing drainage pattern. And if you did, I was curious how a surveyor would go about creating a survey map for drainage pattern after the construction has already begun for the area in question (in this case the driveway had been already removed) ? Thank you for your time,


Taking a look at the Building and Safety document he attached I saw it was about “Cross Lot Drainage” . I hope this guy practices law better than he can read guidelines about “Cross Lot Drainage”. Actually, all he had to do was read the title of the doc. to realize that it does not even apply to his situation…not even close!

And we have proof yet again that it does not require even ordinary intelligence to pass the bar.
Or so it seems.

1. You did not work for him. You did not need to communicate with him.
2. Whether or not drainage patterns were a part of your original scope of services with your client, they are now.
3. You have now inherited two clients, who happen to have a disagreement.
4. Your "new client" may be reading this forum.

LA County was basically the test tube baby concerning the "common enemy doctrine", and challenges thereto, with respect to the philosophy of stormwater control.

Your new lawyer client probably does not realize just how extensive the case history is, and will probably get himself lost somewhere along the line. Your original client's civil engineer probably by now has quadrupled his fee. And your original client is probably rather upset by what has just transpired.

LS_8750 wrote:1. You did not work for him. You did not need to communicate with him..

Maybe I did not need to, but I wanted to.

2. Whether or not drainage patterns were a part of your original scope of services with your client, they are now...

Nope. I refuse to do an existing drainage pattern survey just because some guy is replacing his driveway on a flat lot. The attorney is just blowing smoke.

3. You have now inherited two clients, who happen to have a disagreement....

How do you figure I have two clients??

4. Your "new client" may be reading this forum....

I hope he enjoys it.

Your new lawyer client .

When did he become my new client? I wouldn't work for the guy even if he asked me.

And your original client is probably rather upset by what has just transpired.

Did you talk to him since I posted?

LS_8750 wrote:1. You did not work for him. You did not need to communicate with him.
2. Whether or not drainage patterns were a part of your original scope of services with your client, they are now.
3. You have now inherited two clients, who happen to have a disagreement.
4. Your "new client" may be reading this forum.

LA County was basically the test tube baby concerning the "common enemy doctrine", and challenges thereto, with respect to the philosophy of stormwater control.

Your new lawyer client probably does not realize just how extensive the case history is, and will probably get himself lost somewhere along the line. Your original client's civil engineer probably by now has quadrupled his fee. And your original client is probably rather upset by what has just transpired.

I'm confused by your response. I do not see any implied contract being made by Paul to the adjoiner, and what it appears Paul even said via email amounted to a "can you clarify what you are saying" type of answer, which is not much of anything.

From the attorney's attachment, "Whenever a project involves cross-lot drainage, a licensed survey map shall be provided to show the drainage pattern of the subject and relevant adjoining lots and the presence of any property line walls."

I am impressed with LA County. They are aware of the litigious environment concerning cross parcel drainage issues.

What I am saying is that any boundary line survey inherently includes consideration of the extrinsic evidence, not only concerning boundary line location, but concerning the potential of other rights (written/unwritten) with respect to that surveyed boundary line. That includes drainage issues.

I think this is important. Too many boundary line surveys fail to take note of drainage patterns. There may be prescriptive, or other, rights associated with drainage courses, or watercourses. I am working on two inverse condemnation cases right now where the complaints are chiefly based on the results of altered drainage courses. My job on both has been to determine exactly how the present day drainage patterns differ from pre-development, sometimes referred to as "natural", conditions, and to explain the impacts of the altered present day drainage patterns on the affected parcels.

So, I am saying this: You conducted a boundary line survey for your client. His attorney neighbor called you out and asked if you performed any work additional to a "basic boundary survey". What exactly constitutes a "basic boundary survey"? Is there such a thing? (HELP ME CLSA BRETHREN) Should your "basic boundary line survey" also include noting the drainage patterns on your map (as a minimum industry standard of practice)? I bet your attorney neighbor believes so, hence my comment about you acquiring your attorney friend as a new client. I for one would protect myself and incorporate those drainage patterns into my survey, whether it was included in my scope of work or not. Your new attorney client might just target you for negligence.

You never know where your map might end up. I did a survey concerning a flood a couple of years ago that landed on Nancy Pelosi's desk. I did a cheap corner record type of survey a couple of years ago where I decided to expound on my work and provide a map that showed a failing retaining wall meandering along that boundary line. Because of the failure, the downhill parcel (my client's) was experiencing what appeared to be nuisance runoff in their back yard. In some places the wall foundation was on the neighbor's parcel, but the top of the wall was on my client's parcel. I provided a 24x36 map that showed it all, I even cut a couple of cross sections to depict the retaining wall failure scenario. The neighbors went to trial, over something silly I can only guess. My map was one of the central exhibits. Again, it was all based on a simple cross lot drainage issue. All was done under the budget of that stupid cheap corner record survey, based on what I observed in the field. It turned out that this client of mine was no friend, they would have turned on me quick had they discovered I had omitted anything from my survey, and of course they thought (despite my detailed scope of work) that they were getting a survey performed by almighty God himself, forget about ALTA standards.

So, to each his/her own. I am not talking about contract implications. I am talking about standards of practice.

You might be on a flat lot, and your attorney neighbor might be blowing smoke, and hassling you. No surprises there, right? I work primarily in the coastal mountains, where drainage issues rank supreme. I am getting calls for work in the eastern sierras concerning exactly the same type of drainage issues. I am getting calls from out of state concerning exactly the same issues.

Mr. Wooley, where are you?

LS_8750 wrote:From the attorney's attachment, "Whenever a project involves cross-lot drainage, a licensed survey map shall be provided to show the drainage pattern of the subject and relevant adjoining lots and the presence of any property line walls."

You are a bit out in left field with no catchers mitt, sun in your eyes and facing the opposite way to catch that ball.