Sequential conveyance (Land Surveying)

by Loren, Sunday, July 28, 2013, 08:38 (675 days ago)

Hi,
I'm not a surveyor but I do have a question I am hoping for some expert advice.

My property/home part of an original subdivision(new York) recorded 1954. There are about 15 houses built from 1954 to 1980 + or-
My home was built in 1969.
The remaining land from the original subdivision maybe 20 acres was sold in 1984 as just a parcel of land- never developed.

It was sold again as a parcel of land to a developer 1993. The developer did a lot line adjustment ( added the bottom portion about 1/3 of acre) to 6 riverside lots. The side boundary lines were not adjusted at that time.

My property is the adjoining land to the newly created subdivision. When the property ,first in new subdivision, was sold and house built (2001) the same surveyor who did the subdivision map for developer (1993) now says there is a boundary line overlap between us.

If have a couple of questions

First did adding the additional property to the bottoms of the remaining lots in any way change the silmultanious conveyance (no sr. Jr rights?)
And also should the overlap have been noted by surveyor in 1993 when the new subdivision was created?

My appreciation to any thoughts

Avatar

Sequential conveyance

by Dave Karoly, Sacramento, CA, Sunday, July 28, 2013, 08:46 (675 days ago) @ Loren

You are probably senior and would get the overlap.

I don't know how a remainder parcel could overlap into a subdivision lot?

The only way to get expert advice is to hire a New York LS. He would have to review the actual documents and possibly do a field survey.

--
We go to gain a little ground which hath in it no profit. -Shakespeare (from Hamlet)

Avatar

Sequential conveyance

by paden cash ⌂ @, The Great State of Oklahoma, Sunday, July 28, 2013, 08:47 (675 days ago) @ Loren

If I'm reading the post correctly, the same surveyor in 1993 and 2001 now says there is some sort of "overlap" issue?

An overlap now probably existed then, I would think. And probably should have been noted at the time of the secondary platting. Lot of variables in what you've said.

Hopefully someone here familiar with New York surveying issues can answer your questions.

--
"Never miss a good chance to shut up."

Will Rogers, 1879-1935, American Humorist

Sequential conveyance

by Loren, Sunday, July 28, 2013, 09:13 (675 days ago) @ paden cash

Thanks for the replies.

We hired surveyor licensed in 2000 . He disagreed with the surveyor from neighbor who had the same surveyor from the new subdivision.
Couldn't resolve so we hired a third independent surveyor 2005 who found most of old evidence he put several points on line .
Everything was quite between neighbors and us until a recent claim of their owning 5 more feet of property.
I went to speak w neighbors surveyor .. Off the record to understand the issue
At this meeting was the first I heard of a boundary overlap ...which as I understand it is an actual deficiency in the total of the original subdivision.

Really trying to figure out did he ,or should he have know of this deficiency when the new subdivision surveyed.?
And also if there is really a deficiency vs a disagreement on the corner monuments placement.
And also if the addition to to property atbthe bottom does that change the original deed created from the original subdivision and as such chane the conveyance status from simultaneous to sequential which would offer Sr Jr rights?

Avatar

Sequential conveyance

by Dave Karoly, Sacramento, CA, Sunday, July 28, 2013, 09:37 (675 days ago) @ Loren

The talk of deficiency sounds like the original large parcel the subdivisions came from is smaller than originally thought. Normally this would be prorated IF the original lot corner monuments can't be found. It sound like the 2005 surveyor found them.

I think New York is different in this regard and you can have an overlap in a subdivision which is not typical of most states. However if 2005 found the original monuments they should control.

Adding to the bottom of some lots should not change the status of those lots.

You need a New York expert who can be persuasive in written narrative form. A lot of surveyors are very good surveyors but not good writers. Sometimes you can persuade the other party to stop causing trouble with a well written and persuasive expert report. But bear in mind your expert may find they are correct and you are the one persuaded.

--
We go to gain a little ground which hath in it no profit. -Shakespeare (from Hamlet)

Avatar

Sequential conveyance

by Dan Dunn @, Northern New Jersey, Monday, July 29, 2013, 06:37 (674 days ago) @ Loren

First did adding the additional property to the bottoms of the remaining lots in any way change the simultaneous conveyance (no sr. Jr rights?)

New York does not treat subdivisions as simultaneous conveyances, but rather as sequential in the order the lots are deeded out. Adding additional property will not change your junior/senior rights unless you were the one conveying the additional land.

And also should the overlap have been noted by surveyor in 1993 when the new subdivision was created?

Yes the overlap should have been shown in 1993 unless it occurred after 1993 by actions of yourself and/or the adjoining owner, (occupation, agreement, etc.). This doesn't seem to be the case based on your post.

Normally in a junior/senior their is no overlap, assuming no occupation or agreement which could possibly change to location of the line. Based on your post above neither of your surveyors are finding an overlap, this makes sense in a purely junior/senior relationship.

What is the adjoining surveyors reason for the existence of an overlap?

Sequential conveyance

by Duane Frymire @, Monday, July 29, 2013, 07:46 (674 days ago) @ Dan Dunn

Common misconception that NY does not treat subdivisions as simultaneous.

In fact they are recognized as simultaneous, but if retracement of individual lots that have been sold and staked by the original developer is possible, then those lines will be held and proration performed on the remaining. The inference of equal size is rebutted by the staking of something different. So the staked lot could be larger or smaller than the remaining ones that are prorated.

Not really a senior rights issue at all.

Of course senior rights may be an issue with the situation posted, but can't really tell from the info given.

Avatar

Sequential conveyance

by Dan Dunn @, Northern New Jersey, Monday, July 29, 2013, 13:01 (674 days ago) @ Duane Frymire

Common misconception that NY does not treat subdivisions as simultaneous.

In fact they are recognized as simultaneous, but if retracement of individual lots that have been sold and staked by the original developer is possible, then those lines will be held and proration performed on the remaining. The inference of equal size is rebutted by the staking of something different. So the staked lot could be larger or smaller than the remaining ones that are prorated.

Based on Mechler v. Dehn, 196 N.Y.S. 460 the court treated the deficiency as a junior/senior problem rather than proportionate the error. I do agree that the monumented and accepted line would trump all.

Sequential conveyance

by Duane Frymire @, Tuesday, July 30, 2013, 05:05 (673 days ago) @ Dan Dunn

Yes, that is the case that gives the misconception, based on the reporters summation and its repitition by text books.

My interpretation is different, but of course I could be wrong.

Sequential conveyance

by Loren, Monday, July 29, 2013, 09:59 (674 days ago) @ Dan Dunn

The surveyors used different points of beginning.
Mine went from the found evidence ( monuments) in the chronological order of sale of property.
The surveyor for neighbor (2000) he also did the survey for developer1993 went from a point below the original houses.
He went to a point in the undeveloped portion

Sequential conveyance

by Loren, Monday, November 11, 2013, 04:26 (569 days ago) @ Loren

Not to belabor this

But I now believe that the " overlay" my neighbors surveyor is talking about is the difference between where he has staked the boundary line vs. Where my surveyor staked the boundary line. They disagreed with one another by about 8" .

Can it be as simple as that or does there have to be some actual deficiency or overage in the whole subdivision deed to be considered an overlay?

Thanks for any help
Sincerely

RSS Feed of thread