Moral, Ethical?

[Moses]

At your first suspicion that the lot was not buildable, you should have told the builder. Instead, you waited 7 weeks.

Now, you are looking at an opportunity to profit from your own mistake at the expense of a valued client. Is that about right?

If you value the builders business, sell the lot at market and forward the profit with a note to the builder. You will have enhanced your reputation and created invaluable goodwill.

Many years ago I found out that a senior partner recieved a "kickback" from a salesperson on a very expensive piece of equipment that I bought. That mistake cost him a great deal.

[nostatic]

Originally posted by Moses


Many years ago I found out that a senior partner recieved a "kickback" from a salesperson on a very expensive piece of equipment that I bought. That mistake cost him a great deal.

he swims with the fishes now?

[competentone]

Originally posted by Moses
At your first suspicion that the lot was not buildable, you should have told the builder. Instead, you waited 7 weeks.

Now, you are looking at an opportunity to profit from your own mistake at the expense of a valued client. Is that about right?

If you value the builders business, sell the lot at market and forward the profit with a note to the builder. You will have enhanced your reputation and created invaluable goodwill.

Moses, re-read the description and previous comments. My understanding is that the builder is receiving what he wanted and agreed to previously -- the sale had just never closed. The builder is happy with his $35,000. Jim C. was assuming the risk during those years the property hadn't closed -- if the property value had gone down, the builder could have still demanded the $35,000 and Jim would have had to eat the difference if he resold the property.

Additionally, you just can't go around and be "giving" $35,000+ to people. The IRS likes to get their cut in every transaction. The more I think about it, the more I don't like the idea of Jim trying to be "nice" and selling for under fair market value. (Read my previous comment.)

[Burnin' oil]

Originally posted by nostatic
he swims with the fishes now?

Nice knowing you , Todd

[Jims5543]

Originally posted by Moses
At your first suspicion that the lot was not buildable, you should have told the builder. Instead, you waited 7 weeks.

Now, you are looking at an opportunity to profit from your own mistake at the expense of a valued client. Is that about right?

If you value the builders business, sell the lot at market and forward the profit with a note to the builder. You will have enhanced your reputation and created invaluable goodwill.

Many years ago I found out that a senior partner recieved a "kickback" from a salesperson on a very expensive piece of equipment that I bought. That mistake cost him a great deal.

My client, closed the property prior to getting the survey taking a risk. I assumed he did not close until he reiceved the survey and I was thusly holding up the closing. I had no idea he closed w/o a survey.

It took me 6 weeks to decided if it was my mistake or someone else screwed up. My biggest mistake was not telling my client something didn't look right, but again, I thought he did not close without a survey and was waiting for that phone call screaming for the survey to be delivered.


At the time we were all very busy, my client was on a "lot grab" campaign, look at like stocks rising and trying to buy on the way up. My client was one of the biggest factors that affected this towns lot prices. We were trying to juggle this job and its problems while keeping everything else on schedule.

The builder paid 25K for the lot. They are selling it to me for 35K as they feel this is what they have tied up in it interest wise. I even told the manager of this division (I referred to him as the owner earlier) that he should jump on this. He was not interested.

So now I get the lot. The market value last year was over 100K on this lot but the market is on a decline 70K is more in line now.

[Matt Meyer]

I assume you are a Land Surveyor licensed in Florida.

I am unfamiliar with Fla. law and am not a Land Surveyor, so just some things to think about.

This is the wrong forum to ask this question. (Sorry guys). You need to discuss this with other surveyors and possibly an attorney in Fla. familiar with this area of law to determine what your obligations are.

I believe you are obligated to report the error 20 years ago to the board. They will probably take no action as the original surveyor is no longer practicing per your description.

I do not see how you have any recourse against the previous surveyor. Purchasing the lot is to CYA and keep on good terms with your client. He closed without your report, your report took longer than usual because of an error by a previous surveyor. It sounds like you performed due diligence.

The owner of the house purchased the propriety thinking everything was fine. Are the other markers correct? I do not know particulars, but it is conceivable that this purchase will not add value to their propriety above what they have already paid. If that is the case they will see anything but perhaps a nominal mark up as extortion. Even if it adds value to what they thought was their properity, they have no choice so they will be unhappy about it.

I think you should hook your client and the homeowner up and stay out of it. It doesn't feel right. This has the potential to be a real mess. It looks like there is a simple solution. If you purchase the lot and sell it at a profit be prepared to defend your actions to the board that regulates Land Surveyors if there is one in Fla.

[Jims5543]

Matt - the owner of the house paid cash and decided to save $300 and not get a survey before the closing.

What we have here is 2 parties that decided to close with no survey both paid cash.

The previous surveyor closed his doors 5 months ago. The lady in the house had ample opportunity to get this ball rolling and decided to sit on her arse and do nothing.

I went as far as to contact the owner of the house and offer to hook her up with the builder and let her buy it direct. Not interested.

I offered the builder the same. Not interested.

The owner of the house has chosen instead to lawyer up and do it the hard way.

I am being forced to buy this lot. I have put this off for a long time and now I am at risk of ruining my relationship with my client over this.

I have decided to go ahead and buy the lot and let whatever insurance company that wants to buy this lot pay fair market value for it based on comps in the area and not considering the encroachment as this is the reason for them buying it.

I have bent over backwards to try to fix this and no one wants my help. So now I am a bystander with a lot that is needed.

The builder already agreed to put in writing the events that led up to my purchase and have it signed and notorized. If this ever came up for professional reveiw I will have my butt covered.

[David]

Originally posted by Acox914
fascinating....

im a CE major and have read about these kinda things LOL...

sell it for fair market, and toss some your builders direction

I agree. It's not like you're ripping off the owner of the encroaching house. They get the land at market value. They might turn around and sell the small lot to someone else and make a profit at your expense.

[pbs911]

This is easy.

If I were you I would want to have the situation resolved, pronto. As a former construction attorney I say either sell it for the purchase price, or become a defendant in the suit brought by the homeowner and a cross-defendant in the suit brought by the developer.

[Matt Meyer]

I don't know law, or Land Surveying, or Fla. nor am I casting judgement. I'm not even offering advice on what to do. My only advise is to talk with those more knowlegable in the specifics of the profession. Don't get your advise on this matter off the PP board. I love these guys, but they may not be Land Surveyors and familiar with what standards you will be held to.

IMHO, The other two parties have behaved badly in regards to the standards of The (Land Surveyor) Board, but they are not Surveyors so the board has no power over them and their actions are of almost no consideration. The previous Surveyor should be reported but he is not relevant to the current situation.

It appears to me that so far you have fullfilled your obligations as a Land Surveyor. I don't see why you are obligated to purchase the lot or otherwise compensate the developer, he closed without your report. I don't think it is customary nor required to share details of a survey before you issue a report, but I am not a Surveyor (CMA). It appears to me that you are buying the properity to stay in good graces with a good client.

It appears to me that you owe absolutely nothing to the home owner, other than further good professional conduct. Which as a professional and good citizen you owe everyone. $300, 20 years ago would have prevented alot of grief, but that has nothing to do with you.

That being said, don't jepordize your professional standing for a quick buck. I would expect the homeowner's attorney is going to report you to The Board unless they are completely satified, whether or not you do anything wrong. It is too easy and they have no down side. (Another piece of advice from me, From now on I would treat all dealings with the Attorney as if your actions will be reported to The Board.) The lawyer makes me nervous.

To be honest, I think the fact you are even buying the lot would be frowned upon (not necesssarly wrong, just not encouraged) which puts you on shakey ground. The developer closed without your report, not your fault.

Now if you are acting in good faith to resolve this, I personally believe (not a professional recommendation, see bold above) you are entitled to compensation. It appears the two parties are practically forcing you to be an intermediary. The lawyer is probably billing better than $100/hr. I think this distinction is important: compensation for your costs, time, actions, risks, etc. vs. the appearance of making a quick buck.

It does appear to be outside your scope as a Land Surveyor so see the bold above.

I really hope this works out the best for you.

[nota]

I would buy the lot not as a person or your survey corp
but as seperate Fla CORP just set up for that deal
to limit you risk and rep as a surveyor
[note it only cost a few hundred to set up a CORP in Fla]
and would not pay the owner any more then the 24k he paid
his costs of a loan ect are not your fault
then sue the home owner for taking your land to cover your rear

a fair settlement could offer to take 1/2 the value of the added land plus the increased value of the existing lot+house that is part on the adjoining lot at the point of sale of the property
as they cannot sell the house currently IF they plan a quick sale

BUT RESEARCH the LAW on if they OWN the land by occupation
for the last 20 years FIRST

I was told occupation is a major factor in law in Fla
so they just may own the land under the house
by occupation
now if the set back to the propery line is a different matter
and depends on local laws and rules

btw 3k closing costs is very high as you need a cash deal
for no bank would loan on a mess like this one

[Rodeo]

I can't believe no one has brought up adverse possession. In my state, and many others, if that house was encroaching on the land for 10 or more years, THE LADY OWNS IT. And if her yard is on the side of her house and she (or prior owners) has cared for it for ten or more years, THE LADY OWNS THE SIDEYARD TOO.

Check the laws in your state. If she has a valid adverse possession claim, sell her the property for what you have into it. Otherwise, you are not buying a lot. You are buying an expensive lawsuit that will ultimately net you something less than the entire lot.

If what you're left with after he claim is not buildable, you are screwed. At that point might as well sell it to her for a buck. Better than paying taxes and insurance on it for the rest of your life.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

True that Rodeo - I've heard of this happening also. Obviously it depends on the laws of the state, but thinking back to my undergrad. course in Business Law (that I took in FL), there was specific mention of it. I believe it was seven years as well, but obviously check with an attorney practicing in FL.

[competentone]

Originally posted by Rodeo
I can't believe no one has brought up adverse possession.

I mentioned the question of adverse possession in my first response on the first page.

[Jims5543]

Originally posted by Rodeo
I can't believe no one has brought up adverse possession. In my state, and many others, if that house was encroaching on the land for 10 or more years, THE LADY OWNS IT. And if her yard is on the side of her house and she (or prior owners) has cared for it for ten or more years, THE LADY OWNS THE SIDEYARD TOO.

Check the laws in your state. If she has a valid adverse possession claim, sell her the property for what you have into it. Otherwise, you are not buying a lot. You are buying an expensive lawsuit that will ultimately net you something less than the entire lot.

If what you're left with after he claim is not buildable, you are screwed. At that point might as well sell it to her for a buck. Better than paying taxes and insurance on it for the rest of your life.

The possesion has to be open and notorious. In other words the owner of the land the house was on would have to know it was on there and do nothing for XX amount of years and then the squatter could then declare adverse possesion.

I do not know if I had been clear. The reason I offered to buy the land 30 months ago was because I value my relationship with this particualr client. I wanted to try to make it right. I knoew that the lot would have to be bought and I was not offering to turn a profit.

I am not buying the lot to flip it I am mearly honoring a deal I made 2 years ago with my builder.

[Noah930]

How much does that lawyer make? FIgure out how much time you've got invested in all this hassle, multiply it by that pr*ck attorney's hourly rate, and tack that amount onto the $35K you've got invested already. Your conscience is clear (as defined by the attorneys' standards of morality), you make a bit or your time, and everyone else is happy (sort of).

[Rodeo]

Originally posted by Jim Cesiro
The possesion has to be open and notorious. In other words the owner of the land the house was on would have to know it was on there and do nothing for XX amount of years and then the squatter could then declare adverse possesion. ***

Your first sentence is correct, but your accuracy goes downhill fom there ... free advice: Consult a lawyer. If that house and sideyard have been there for 15 years, she owns the property underneath it, at least under traditional adverse possession law. Florida might be different.

You really really need to talk to a lawyer before you make your decision.

[competentone]

Originally posted by Rodeo
Your first sentence is correct, but your accuracy goes downhill fom there ... free advice: Consult a lawyer. If that house and sideyard have been there for 15 years, she owns the property underneath it, at least under traditional adverse possession law. Florida might be different.

You really really need to talk to a lawyer before you make your decision.

I have to agree with that. I was talking with my wife during dinner about the situation, she's just a law student, but was saying similar things.

If the property the house sits on is taken away from the lot you're buying, and if the remaining portion of your lot is too small to build on, you might end up owning a piece of real estate that would only be sale-able to a neighboring property owner if one of them wanted a larger sized lot. This condition could significantly reduce its market value.

My earlier comments about any potential risks of the IRS coming after you for any "gift taxes" if you offered the property to the encroaching house owner at below market prices should not be an issue so long as significant consideration (the $35K would be considered significant consideration) was involved in the transaction.

I know you've said you want to keep your relationship with the builder on good terms, but if it turned out that buying the property was going to be a really bad deal, you might not have to go through with the transaction based upon both parties inaction to complete the transaction in a timely fashion. (You did say you were thinking about getting out of the business, so preserving the business relationship might not be your top priority.) Your earlier agreement to buy the property might not represent a valid contract any longer because neither of you acted to conclude the transaction in a reasonable period of time.

[djmcmath]

Originally posted by Jim Cesiro
He is trying to implicate lack of moral character if it is sold for any more.

Whoah, did you say that a lawyer was trying to implicate lack of moral character?!? lol, that's rich.

[pbs911]

Originally posted by Rodeo
I can't believe no one has brought up adverse possession. In my state, and many others, if that house was encroaching on the land for 10 or more years, THE LADY OWNS IT. And if her yard is on the side of her house and she (or prior owners) has cared for it for ten or more years, THE LADY OWNS THE SIDEYARD TOO.

In Florida, the time period is 7 years, and arises under two situations. Under the first, the AP must make return of the property description to the county appraisor and pay taxes thereon. The land must also be fenced or maintained. It seems here that unless the land is described in the deed. Second, if the lot is described in the dead then it is under color of title and the previously discusses AP actions need not be made. My understanding is the description is not in the deed. BTW, encrouchment onto the land for 20 years would satisfy the open, continuous, exclusive, notorious, and hostile elements.

In Florida, AP is all about paying taxes on the real property claimed.