Activity Feed › Discussion Forums › Strictly Surveying › ALTA Certification to Third Parties
ALTA Certification to Third Parties
Posted by robert-ellis on April 30, 2013 at 8:22 pmDoes anyone have experience with the attorneys for the lender and purchaser asking to be included in the certification i.e. Purchaser, Lender, Title Company, Attorney for Lender, Attorney for Purchaser.
The guys I am speaking with seem to think it is normal to certify to everyone on their list but I am being very reluctant to do so.
a-harris replied 11 years ago 7 Members · 8 Replies- 8 Replies
“7. Certification – The plat or map of an ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey shall bear only the following certification, unaltered, except as may be required pursuant to Section 3.B. above:
To (name of insured, if known), (name of lender, if known), (name of insurer, if known), (names of others as negotiated with the client):
“so negotiate already!! X number of dollars per each and I will certify to every chin in the San Francisco phone book!!
Remember, these guys are real good at telling us what is “standard practice”. :pinch: Do only what you are comfortable with.Not a problem with that but I am having a hard time deciding how my liability changes with each added name. Normally the only people who can sue for breach of contract are people you have a contract with, by adding their names are you creating an implied contract that goes beyond the signed ALTA contract?
The tort of negligent misrepresentation is the theory of law that most commonly is used when land surveyors are sued.
To prove negligent misrepresentation the plaintiff has to prove 4 elements.
Someone justifiably relied upon the work
Damage occurred
The work was not conducted according to the standard of care
By someone who owed the relying party a duty of care.If I do a survey for Smith and
Smith sells the property to Jones and
Jones sells the property to Johnson and
Johnson sells the property to Millercan Miller sue me for negligent misrepresentation?
Maybe. But, one of the things Miller may have to do first is sue Johnson who may have to sue Jones who may have to sue Smith who may have to sue me.
Depending on the exact circumstances this chain of suits is necessary because of the question about to whom did I owe a duty of care. The answer to this question is not always a slam dunk.
I say all that because, when you put the attorneys name in your certification, you remove the barrier of him or her having to prove that you owed them that duty. Putting their name on your map automatically means you have a duty to them and they have one less thing to prove when suing you. That is the only reason for the attorney to have their name on the map. They want you to make it easy for them to sue you.
My experience is when you tell the client about the potentially substantial extra fee (for the extra liability) the client quickly decides that the attorneys name isn’t necessary. This is why the ALTA standards specifically indicate that additional names are to be negotiated.
Larry P
Robert,
What you have is a normal for me, if they want your client or the buyer wants you in court thier attorney will be there anyway. However I do draw the line at “successors and assigns”.Thanks Larry that was a perfect expanation
I come across this all the time.
Adding to what Larry said, I always tell the attorneys that unless they have a direct financial interest in the property, their names will not appear on the survey. In thirty-some years, I have never put an attorneys name on a survey of mine unless they were the purchaser.
:good:
Good post. Thanks.
I put the name(s) that are on the original survey order.
Anything that is requested after that is a different survey order or a modification to the original order.
They are all trying to attach themselves to the one document so they can pass it over and over.
The local title companies are not requiring surveys on many properties that remain non-monumented and show evidence of occupation problems and the next day in a complete opposite trend will go out of their way to require surveys on properties that have monuments and are free from conflicts.
An ALTA that was performed a few years ago before a plant expansion was reused a few months ago by the same title company because they did not want to delay the closing.
IMHO, their practice and procedures are often in conflict with the surveyor’s goal.
As the personnel changes within the title company management, so does their concept of what the standards are.
I was recently asked to do a “four corner survey” (a title company’s new terminology for corners only and no paperwork). Apparently they thought I could go out there and simply go to the correct location and find or set the monuments. It was clear that some RTK jockey has convinced them that was surveying. When I told them they had 5 corners and that what they required would take more effort than that, they were not amused and hired the RTK jockey. The entire property is entirely under pine and hardwood canopy.
“0.02 with some ranting”
Log in to reply.