Earth's Largest Land Surveyor Community
It has become a more common practice here in California for local associations to treat the geographic area of their association as a private area closed to open competation by complaining to the county surveyor and state boards anytime another surveyor set a stake without filing a corner record or record of survey. Because of the recessiona these "policing" surveyors have plenty of time to go around looking for paint and lath, then they investigate to see if a corner record or record of survey is filed.
What is wrong with that you may ask, if you read the act it allows for points on line, here in California without triggering a RS or CR. Often an owner needs the line for setback purposes.
If another party complains to the Board or County Surveyor, they automatically contact the surveyor who staked it, and if he wishes to avoid problems, then he will file an RS or CR. This of course raises costs to the consumer, who did not want or need that.
The surveyor who complained argues that it is for the better of the consumer, but they just dont know it. However when asked if that surveyor who complains has set POL's on new tracts, and not filed CR they will admit this is true, but claim the Act exempts it. This is not true the Act exempts points set for the eventual recording of a map, but new subdivisions have already been recorded, developers would not invest heavily in unrecoreded tracts, the want the vesting secure.
Do you thing the consumer benefits more from competive pricing for work acutally needed or from higher prices for work he does think he needs, but will be forced to pay for. For responses presume the consumer has been fully informed.
This Content Originally Published by a land surveyor to Land Surveyors United Network
The board has decided to place me on probation and pay a fine, based on the judges recommendations. 4 surveyors testified, and basically agreed on nothing. I conceded that the law requires a surveyor to find or set the corners when placing points for construction of fences, walls or structures established from the property line. My previous position was that according to a number of letters from the board filing a record was not required for construction stakes if the property line was established by a recorded map. In other words, if other monuments could be used to mathematically determine the line per recorded map.
At the hearing the Board said those letters were rescinded and no longer valid. Prior to the hearing I had spoken to 2 LS's who were licensed when I was an apprentice, they both told me the board was correct in its assertion that corners need be found or set and recorded. However this is a more recent position, and I should have kept up with the boards position via their website, also one of the ethical principals of surveying is to leave evidence of your survey. I stood corrected. In 2012, well after my infractions, the board changed the verbiage of the law to more implicitly express this requirement. I'm sorry if I mislead anyone, however, I did a lot of research, not only in California but other states, and can confidently say based on that research which supported my position, it was and honest mistake. Furthermore, the Judges report did express the fact that setting markers based on property lines is common practice for larger firms, utility and public agencies without filing records of those points. (such as 20 & 80's, ROW, property "takes", fences for water channels, highways, large parcels, building setbacks, etc. etc.) and that I suggested the board use me as a whistle blower, similar to one of the surveyors who testified who has at least 30 complaints filed with the board. I wouldn't go after the little guy until the big boys cleaned up their act! Concerning the RICO act, evidence indicated that a number of surveyors are acting in collusion against other surveyors, whether for the purpose of limiting competition was not questioned at the hearing. However, it is my opinion, that it is being done for some self serving interest.