Affordable, targeted advertising at RPLS Today

Community Forums

Is this fraud? Poll is created on July 25, 2018 10:37 am

  
  
  

Is this fraud?  

Page 1 / 2 Next
  RSS

Daniel S. McCabe
(@daniel-s-mccabe)
1,000+ posts Member
Joined: 8 years  ago
Posts: 1472
July 25, 2018 10:37 am  

I am aware of a plat that was done a little over ten years ago. The PLS  that issued the plat identifies it as a "plat of survey of the Joe Bleaux Family partition", identifies the bearing base that he used, states the standards the "survey" was done to and makes the piece of paper look like a survey was done of a piece of property that divided a tract into two tracts. 

This plat was sent to the parish for approval and it was approved.

At the bottom of the "notes" section is a statement that basically says that no field work was done to produce this "survey".

The state board can't do anything about the minimum standards issues because it can only act for five years after the work was done, however, in cases of fraud it can act for two years from the date of discovery, which was two months ago.

I am of the opinion that this is fraud. 

Is this fraud?

:beer: :hi5: :beer:
Dan McCabe


ReplyQuote
David Livingstone
(@david-livingstone)
500+ posts Member
Joined: 8 years  ago
Posts: 825
July 25, 2018 10:47 am  

Terrible practice?  Yes!  Fraud, I don't think so.  Fraud is a step beyond doing a bad job.  He does have a note sort of covering him self although saying no field work was done probably wouldn't meet minimum standards.  I've seen more than one of these in my day.

Dave


ReplyQuote
paden cash
(@paden-cash)
5,000+ posts Member
Joined: 8 years  ago
Posts: 8902
July 25, 2018 10:49 am  

I'm thinking since there is a "disclaimer" upon the document that fraud would be difficult to "prove"; as opposed to indicating corners were set or found on a document when no field survey was performed.  

“I'm glad I will not be young in a world with no wilderness” - Aldo Leopold


ReplyQuote
James Fleming
(@james-fleming)
5,000+ posts Member
Joined: 8 years  ago
Posts: 5032
July 25, 2018 10:52 am  

LA Civil Code 1953

SECTION 2. FRAUD

Fraud is a misrepresentation or a suppression of the truth made with the intention either to obtain an unjust advantage for one party or to cause a loss or inconvenience to the other.

I ain't no lawyer, but at first glance it looks like if you put the client on notice that they're getting a substandard product, it can't be fraud.

“Civilization is not an endless succession of inventions and discoveries, but the task of ensuring that certain things last.”
— Nicolás Gómez Dávila


ReplyQuote
cordgrass
(@cordgrass)
100+ posts Member
Joined: 3 years  ago
Posts: 143
July 25, 2018 12:55 pm  
Posted by: Daniel S. McCabe

I am aware of a plat that was done a little over ten years ago. The PLS  that issued the plat identifies it as a "plat of survey of the Joe Bleaux Family partition", identifies the bearing base that he used, states the standards the "survey" was done to and makes the piece of paper look like a survey was done of a piece of property that divided a tract into two tracts. 

This plat was sent to the parish for approval and it was approved.

At the bottom of the "notes" section is a statement that basically says that no field work was done to produce this "survey".

The state board can't do anything about the minimum standards issues because it can only act for five years after the work was done, however, in cases of fraud it can act for two years from the date of discovery, which was two months ago.

I am of the opinion that this is fraud. 

Is this fraud?

I see this all the time "desktop survey".  At least he told you was not done in the field.  Couple i have retracted have bubbles or circles on the corners with no legend.  Most of the time nothing set. 


ReplyQuote
Duane Frymire
(@duane-frymire)
1,000+ posts Member
Joined: 8 years  ago
Posts: 1535
July 25, 2018 2:03 pm  

Yes. Fraud is different when a professional opinion is involved.  The note is not enough to enable a consumer to know an actual survey was not performed, given the other language. 


ReplyQuote

Upgrade and save 50%

Norman Oklahoma
(@norman-oklahoma)
2,500+ posts Member
Joined: 3 years  ago
Posts: 3909
July 25, 2018 2:21 pm  

This exact thing was pretty common here in Clark County, Washington in the 70's and 80's. Many were recorded by the subdivider without a Surveyor even involved. Poor practice, but not illegal. At least not then.

Also I've seen plenty of deeds creating lots by description only. Neither illegal nor unethical.  

"Convention is like the shell to the chick, a protection till he is strong enough to break it through." Learned Hand


ReplyQuote
Brad Ott
(@brad-ott)
2,500+ posts Member
Joined: 8 years  ago
Posts: 4369
July 25, 2018 2:34 pm  

My “yes” vote should not count.  I am a little bit tired from a light field day and voted “yes” like a “dick” before I read the thread.

 

Beer Leg dot com R O C K S ! !
If you find this forum valuable, then click here https://rplstoday.com/donate/


ReplyQuote
Peter Ehlert
(@peter-ehlert)
2,500+ posts Member
Joined: 8 years  ago
Posts: 2778
July 25, 2018 3:26 pm  

Can the new dividing lines be surveyed without great ambiguity?

I see no problem with drawing a picture to illustrate the partition of land. Many local agencies require those sketches.
Sometimes a drawing is more clear for the consumers/owners than trying to understand the words in a legal description.

"Record Data Parcel Maps" have been permitted in California for ages, and Subdivisions don't always have the lot corners monumented either.
The field work happens when it is needed and someone wants things marked out.

IF what was done was contrary to the local regulations, report it! (or get those rules changed)

The Manual Of Instructions ... a History Book


ReplyQuote
A Harris
(@a-harris)
5,000+ posts Member
Joined: 8 years  ago
Posts: 7213
July 25, 2018 6:20 pm  

 The statement that it was not surveyed on the ground is enough to say that it is not a survey and it should never be relied upon as a survey.

It simply stands as the "intent" of how the family wish to divide their estate.

RPLS NE Texas
d[-_-]b


ReplyQuote
Skeeter1996
(@skeeter1996)
500+ posts Member
Joined: 4 years  ago
Posts: 606
July 25, 2018 9:49 pm  

How about a 26 lot subdivision using GLO Government Lot lines as it's outer boundaries. Four different Surveyors only find 6 lot pins, which are nails, spikes, and 1/2" rebar. Record monuments are supposed to be 3/4" iron pins.Pretty obviously a paper survey that was never monumented. The Developer claims he's not liable to pay for fixing the problem because he is past the Statute of limitations for fraud because the survey was filed 20 years ago. Many landowners dont know theres a problem with the location of their lots. Doesn't the Statute of Limitations start at the time of delivery of the fraud?


ReplyQuote
Daniel Ralph
(@daniel-ralph)
500+ posts Member
Joined: 4 years  ago
Posts: 531
July 26, 2018 3:29 pm  

In my opinion this may rise to the level of a fraudulent survey if the PLS contracted with the owner for something other then was delivered. Or if the owner and/or the PLS represented to the parish something other then what was delivered. I think that there needs to be damage done in order to an action to take place. My experience is that a BOR will enter this after a court has determined if a law has been broken and a licencee needs to be disciplined.  

BTW, that five year limit for a BOR to act on something is horse poop.  

But your mileage may vary. 

Dan Moehrke, PLS


RADAR and R.J. Schneider liked
ReplyQuote

Upgrade and save 50%

Skeeter1996
(@skeeter1996)
500+ posts Member
Joined: 4 years  ago
Posts: 606
July 26, 2018 9:23 pm  

Nobody cares about the Surveyor, he's dead. The landowners want someone other than them to pay to fix the fraudulently done subdivision. The Developer made all the money, I think he should be the one held liable.


ReplyQuote
FL/GA PLS.
(@flga-pls)
2,500+ posts Member
Joined: 8 years  ago
Posts: 3324
July 27, 2018 2:47 am  

@paden-cash

OFF SUBJECT

Yer just beggin' for a visit from Homeland Security ain't you? 😉 

"I,d rather die while I'm living than live while I'm dead"....Jimmy Buffett
"All I know is, if you look around at the human race you've got to wonder what the hell God was thinking!" ...Lee Marvin, "Paint Your Wagon"


ReplyQuote
Brian Allen
(@brian-allen)
1,000+ posts Member
Joined: 8 years  ago
Posts: 1548
July 27, 2018 8:46 am  

"The landowners want someone other than them to pay to fix the fraudulently done subdivision."

While I can somewhat understand the landowners position, they should have done their due diligence before buying the parcels.  When someone buys a pig in poke like this, I have little sympathy.   I still cannot understand someone making (most likely) the biggest purchase of their life without knowing exactly what they are buying.   


ReplyQuote
Page 1 / 2 Next
Affordable, targeted advertising at RPLS Today
  
Working

Please Login or Register