Potential boundary dispute - how are surveys done today when yesteryear's markers are gone?

[mawipafl]

Larry Caldwell --- I've been calling it a "Plan" purely because that's what it's titled as, "Subdivision Plan". I'm sure it was one of the many documents submitted to the city's planning board because it has all the sign-off signatures of the board, the city clerk, the owner of the property, and the engineer who produced the plan.

This is a small section of what we've been turning into a dog-eared piece of paper ...



Thanks for clearing up the difference between corner pins and stakes. I surmise the rebar were just stakes as a visual aid only to (probably) show the general vicinity of corners and not markers meant to show the exact boundary points when the engineer's surveyor was out on the property divvying the land up.

NY Annie and oldtrader ... we did some research about adverse possession, and apparently in MA simply mowing and maintaining a piece of property, even for 50 years, is not enough to claim possession. For adverse possession to be considered, the land in contention has to have been used (or is being used) for something (like a driveway or garage or firepit area, etc.) with permission being granted by the true owner. This "permission" doesn't necessarily have to be verbally acknowledged nor in writing, but if it's an obvious encroachment and the true owner just "sleeps" and doesn't protect it, that can be considered permission. I also believe that when the clock starts ticking, it ticks for 20 years here in MA before the adverse possessor can claim the land. We are beyond the 20 years, and although there have been multiple owners, the count down began in 1967. It's due diligence on the part of each subsequent owner since then to have had the property properly surveyed and to retract permission which didn't occur. However, just mowing isn't enough anyway.

Perhaps we could claim a prescriptive easement since we've traversed the property to our compost pile. But again that would be difficult - MA tends to favor against claims of adverse possession and prescriptive easements.

oldtrader -- it's been the same with us and with generally everyone in the neighborhood, that we don't make noise with our neighbors. I'm sure there are encroachments everywhere in the neighborhood - bushes, trees, fences placed over boundary lines. Even as houses have been bought and sold many times over the years, there have been no issues, at least not serious ones, as far as we know.

But now we have a developer building a house on spec and being a brat. It's just plain ridiculous that he wants to make a stink about it when there's no adverse affect upon him nor upon his ability to sell this new house. There is an old-fashioned mentality here (right or wrong, that's how it is) ... none of us raised the red flag when he didn't get a variance because his frontage is 9' short of the required 100'. The boundary dispute wouldn't give him that 9', so that's not why he's being a jerk. And he has way more than the required square footage (min. 10,000 sq ft and he has more than an acre), so that's not the issue either. He also doesn't need this strip of land for any required setbacks, nor would whoever buys the house have any adversity upon their outdoor living space (the driveway and garage, and backyard patio and deck are on the far side of that house from our property).

He opened this can of worms as a knee-jerk reaction to our asking him to stop clearing outside the scope of work (his plan was to leave vegetation on the boundary for privacy for both properties). Although it's his land and he can do whatever he wants, it was just an unfriendly and unneighborly thing to do to attempt to clear-cut it all.

As a developer he's not going to want to pay to erect a fence 270' - maybe he will, who knows. But before that occurs we'll have our survey in hand and we'll know just where the boundary is.

[oldtrader]

I also believe that when the clock starts ticking, it ticks for 20 years here in MA before the adverse possessor can claim the land. We are beyond the 20 years, and although there have been multiple owners, the count down began in 1967.

Actually in most states, the count down begins when a new owner becomes the owner, and in many does not start till the 2 parties are aware there is a problem. That is why, adverse possession rarely is effective to acquire property. That is why in the example I gave above, for my son and his neighbor. Until they were aware of encroachment the count down could not start.

But now we have a developer building a house on spec and being a brat. It's just plain ridiculous that he wants to make a stink about it when there's no adverse affect upon him nor upon his ability to sell this new house. There is an old-fashioned mentality here (right or wrong, that's how it is) ... none of us raised the red flag when he didn't get a variance because his frontage is 9' short of the required 100'. The boundary dispute wouldn't give him that 9', so that's not why he's being a jerk. And he has way more than the required square footage (min. 10,000 sq ft and he has more than an acre), so that's not the issue either. He also doesn't need this strip of land for any required setbacks, nor would whoever buys the house have any adversity upon their outdoor living space (the driveway and garage, and backyard patio and deck are on the far side of that house from our property).

He is not being a jerk, he is taking the wise approach to the situation. When the property is financed for a buyer, they will demand a survey today (not always done in the past). If the survey comes out different than what the buyer is shown the property to be, it can kill sales, etc., until the problem is solved. When we developed a lot, we would not settle for less than a survey before building, and all lines properly marked. I have seen it happen where the property the owner thought he owned, was not the property that their house was built on but next door, and in one situation the lot they actually owned was across a state 2 lane highway, and up a hill it would have been impossible to build on.

From experience I can tell you, that anyone that would build a new home without having the property properly surveyed and in agreement with neighbors, is a fool.

As a developer he's not going to want to pay to erect a fence 270' - maybe he will, who knows. But before that occurs we'll have our survey in hand and we'll know just where the boundary is.

What you are doing, is for your own self protection. Once the survey is in place, you know exactly what you own and where the boundaries are.

oldtrader -- it's been the same with us and with generally everyone in the neighborhood, that we don't make noise with our neighbors. I'm sure there are encroachments everywhere in the neighborhood - bushes, trees, fences placed over boundary lines. Even as houses have been bought and sold many times over the years, there have been no issues, at least not serious ones, as far as we know.

One of these days, there will be a serious problem in situations like this, and it is a lot better for you to get it done now, than wait till there is a problem. Lenders, etc., require surveys today, due to disputes between owners that can develop.

[SalamanderSmile]

Just as a caution, we lived in Waltham in a platted subdivision dating from 1900, well marked and paid a Sudbury survey company close to $1000 to give us a metes and bounds for an easement. They were wrong. They said my garage was in the street. They were there with instruments and everything and had to do a do-over because the nimwit interns/trainees they sent into the field did it wrong. So yes, even though its a "stake survey" which makes everything seem so official and formal, it can still be wrong.

[Darrett]

Originally Posted by mawipafl

Larry Caldwell --- I've been calling it a "Plan" purely because that's what it's titled as, "Subdivision Plan". I'm sure it was one of the many documents submitted to the city's planning board because it has all the sign-off signatures of the board, the city clerk, the owner of the property, and the engineer who produced the plan.

This is a small section of what we've been turning into a dog-eared piece of paper ...



Thanks for clearing up the difference between corner pins and stakes. I surmise the rebar were just stakes as a visual aid only to (probably) show the general vicinity of corners and not markers meant to show the exact boundary points when the engineer's surveyor was out on the property divvying the land up.

One thing to look at on that plan is if there is a surveyor's statement or anything of the like. Sometimes you'll see a note that says "1/2 inch iron rebar set at all interior lot corners". They often won't show each individual monument.

Even without that note, if there is a way to verify the rebar were original monuments set by the surveyor at, or close to the time of the parcel split, they may be the best evidence of the true boundary location and should be held over a mathematical solution, especially if improvements were constructed in accordance with that location.

The most recent surveyor should have a recorded map with existing rebar tied out and their relationship to his boundary determination shown.

[Rabrrita]

Corner Pins, Lot Stakes, Flags, etc are all subject to being removed, buried or moved for whatever reason. All surveyors I've seen start at a fixed survey monument and uses that to find a corner. None have ever used only the lot markers as their starting point.