Activity Feed › Discussion Forums › Strictly Surveying › ALTA Record Description Revision per Attorney
ALTA Record Description Revision per Attorney
Posted by armichael on July 22, 2021 at 3:33 pmWorking on an ALTA for a deeded property. The record description provided in the title commitment is sufficient other than excluding a portion of land deeded to the county for a road widening.
I noted on the survey that the description does not take into account said widening deeds.
Attorney wants me to put a saving and accepting note underneath the record description. They are not updating the title commitment. This doesn??t sit well with me. Any thoughts?
Minimum standards require the current record description or a new description with a statement of why it was prepared, and in this case, how the description differs from that of record.
If I create a new description, in my mind, it needs to comply with Maryland minimum standards of practice. Otherwise, I??m not seeing a good disclaimer note to put. ??Description Provided by Attorney. Does not describe same property as record description?? Then nobody??s problem is solved.
My initial thoughts are to provide a completely new description if they want me to stick my neck out. Like to hear what you all think, see if I??m over (or likely under) thinking.
vasurvey3004 replied 2 years, 8 months ago 17 Members · 33 Replies- 33 Replies
What harm would be done in complying with the request and creating the new slightly different legal description under a new heading not called Record Legal Description, not called Survey Legal Description, but called Attorney Requested Legal Description?
@brad-ott probably none, and that is certainly an option. My worry was that I??ll still need to note that the record description does not accurately describe the surveyed property. I was wondering if that would meet resistance, since they want me to remove my note. Thanks Brad
Nothing at all wrong, except the attorney will probably complain that you included them into the direct line of fire for liability. Which is why they want the Surveyor to take the point.
My $0.02
And IANAL and IANAS
@jitterboogie yes i like Brads idea, I was toying with the general idea, but Im hoping to ward off any expected resistance
Remember you are the professional and if it is under your purview/licensing requirements, I don’t believe it would relieve you of liability to follow the attorney’s request.
In fact, squirrel notes can prove that you were negligent in doing your job. Be careful and good luck.
If he wants you to fix the description, do it correctly based upon senior deeds.
If there are deeds to the county, shouldn’t they be of record somewhere? The title company would need to provide those deeds and then in those deeds I presume you would find a legal description of the property they came from and thus you would then be able to use an accurate and of record description of the property. Which should be the same description the attorney wants. If there are no deeds of record to the county then I would tell the attorney to go pound sand. Or you could word it “blah blah blah Your legal description blah blah blah minus any land that may have been deeded to the county, said deeds were not provided by the title company for this survey.”
@lurker I may have been unclear in my original post. I have the deeds that conveyed the road widening, the record deed (and it??s description) predates them. So the title commitment listed an outdated property description. Because of that, I noted on the survey that the record description is outdated and it doesn??t account for the area conveyed to county. Their response was for me to add a saving and excepting note under the description. My issue and question is ??how could this be safely and easily handled on my end?? I??m not just adding a line to the record description. I like the above idea by Brad to just note that the attorney provided it. If the attorney balks then they need to pony up for me to write a new description that complies with my local minimum standards
Read every word in that so-called deed to the county. It may actually only be an easement despite some of the wording. This has been discussed previously.
@armichael Why not just write a new description excepting out the conveyed land and note that the original description predated the conveyances?
I’m not sure if you have submitted anything yet, but for ALTAs I always, always, always deliver a preliminary so that they can revise the commitment accordingly.
If you have not submitted anything yet, work up a preliminary with the record description shown, plus the conveyance that you have discovered, and place a big bold note that said portion of subject property appears to have been dedicated/deeded to county for right of way purposes.
Easy-peasey. You don’t have to mess with the description, you show the evidence you have discovered through independent research, and the ball is back in the title company’s court. Once they have that information, they ought to be revising that commitment. If not, you have still performed your due diligence without altering the record.
“…people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.” -Neil PostmanThe original description excepting out the road hardly requires a surveyor to write.
The title people should take care of that with your review.
My approach in cases like this is to contact the title officer, tell them what I’ve found, and see if they would like to issue an amended report and/or description. Usually they do but now and then they convince me that are correct in the first place. All before I issue any map.
These reports are not chiseled in stone.
@mightymoe correct, and it is usually updated in a revised commitment per my experience. Not the case today.
I would write a description based on my survey like I have done hundreds of times before. I would state that the description was based on my survey.
I would sleep well that night knowing I had done my job.
@norman-oklahoma
Agreed. But OP indicated that he has already brought this to the attention of the title company, and they don’t seem to be getting it. A ROW dedication isn’t exactly a complicated thing to understand.
I’m going to be delivering a preliminary for review of Schedule B exceptions, which will likely result in some being amended or deleted, which means I’ll be modifying my survey before I finalize it anyways. Rather than spin my wheels any more, if they’re not getting it, I’ll produce the survey and send it their way.
“…people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.” -Neil PostmanWell, if they’ve looked at it and don’t want to change anything on the commitment, then it’s pretty clear how to handle it.
ALTA standards require that we show the current description at minimum. If there is a new description, we are required to explain why a new description was prepared and how it differs from the record one.
Add the new one, note why it’s there and what it means, and send it back…and if they then update their title commitment and want you to revise the survey, it’s an extra charge.
(Edit to add: I’m not trying to be flip, I really do think that you have done your due diligence here and can both adhere to the ALTA standards and your professional obligation.)
“…people will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.” -Neil Postman- Posted by: @armichael
Working on an ALTA for a deeded property. The record description provided in the title commitment is sufficient other than excluding a portion of land deeded to the county for a road widening.
I noted on the survey that the description does not take into account said widening deeds.
Attorney wants me to put a saving and accepting note underneath the record description. They are not updating the title commitment. This doesn??t sit well with me. Any thoughts?
Minimum standards require the current record description or a new description with a statement of why it was prepared, and in this case, how the description differs from that of record.
If I create a new description, in my mind, it needs to comply with Maryland minimum standards of practice. Otherwise, I??m not seeing a good disclaimer note to put. ??Description Provided by Attorney. Does not describe same property as record description?? Then nobody??s problem is solved.
My initial thoughts are to provide a completely new description if they want me to stick my neck out. Like to hear what you all think, see if I??m over (or likely under) thinking.
My first question is why are we not on a conference call with the Title Company discussing why the proposed deed language (PTR description) does not exclude (except) the road widening. Your state laws may vary.
@rover83 thank you for the good advice. I guess the tricky part for me was how to handle the attorney while producing a quality product for all parties. Let me ask you a follow up question- do you personally show the record AND newly prepared descriptions on your ALTAs in such a case?
Log in to reply.