I’ve wanted to bring this up before but never got around to it.  But, I just received one of these vague requests and I wanted to post for input from my fellow practicing land surveyors.

Here’s the scoop: on August 20, 2013 we prepared an ALTA survey of a retail tract in south Georgia, for a client in Florida.  Client’s attorney just sent email with pdf of our 2013 ALTA with this request : “See attached you have done in 2013. We need this exact survey certified to” (Bank XYZ).  The lender we certified to in 2013 is bank ABC.  What I presume, as is usually the case, is that they are refinancing while rates are down and bank XYZ just wants a new date and their name on it.  Sounds simple enough, right?

What I’ve learned is that attorneys pay NO ATTENTION to any disclaimer that we have such as “name change only, not recertified” or “revision of 2018 is office only, boundary and site conditions are not recertified”.  We’ve done things like this for years.  But in the last year or two I’ve noticed that the “name change” plats are being referred to as an “update” or even “resurvey”.  In drilling down a little more, I see that our statute of limitation statute gives us end of exposure to civil damages if filed after “more than six years from the date of the survey or plat” (OCGA 9-3-30.2).  So, regardless of what disclaimers we are putting on there, we are essentially doing a full re-issue and 6 year extension of our liability window whenever we put a new date on a plat for any reason.  As one attorney told me when I asked him to look at it: “the law doesn’t say which date is applicable, so any of them are.  If I’m filing the suit, I definitely choose the newest one, and leave it up to you to prove that I used the wrong date.  If the law doesn’t spell it out, your attorney probably doesn’t argue it, you have no foundation.  The newer date prevails and your liability is 6 years from that date”.

Hopefully this is useful information to the practicing land surveyor.  So, does anyone else run across these type situations or think about this? 

          Back to the specific topic of ALTA surveys, obviously it can cause confusion, especially for non-surveyors, if the date is changed without updating the courthouse research and field work, no matter what additional qualifications or disclaimers are put on the plat.  I WOULD NOT DO IT.  I would not do it, both to protect myself from liability and to protect anyone who might rely on the plat.  As for changing the name of the lending institution, I don’t see a problem with that except the surveyor is taking on additional liability by having certified to the previous lending institution and now to the current one.  I think I would be willing to change the name of the lending institution on the plat, but charge for the work plus a surcharge to pay for e&o for the extra liability incurred; even if, based on the date left on the plat, the statute of limitations seems to have run on my liability.  And I would put a note on the plat clearly stating that the plat was originally certified in the name of “Bank ABC”, that name has been taken off, and the name “Bank XYZ” is substituted “at the request of [name, address, and phone number of the attorney].”  I don't think I would list a date anywhere on the plat for this change because some might construe it to mean the survey has been updated.

          To use the example in your post, Mark, the certification on the “revised” ALTA plat might read:

To Bank XYZ:

This is to certify that this map or plat and the survey on which it is based were made in accordance with the 2011 Minimum Standard Detail Requirements for ALTA/ACSM Land Title Surveys, jointly established and adopted by ALTA and NSPS.... The field work was completed on August 20, 2013.  Date of Plat or Map: August 20, 2013....  This plat represents the condition of this property as it was on August 20, 2013.  No representation is made regarding any changes in the title to the property, or any physical characteristics on the ground of the property, or anything that might be disclosed by a survey of the property, that have occurred or may have occurred after August 20, 2013.

          The attorney almost certainly certified the title to this property in 2013.  If he/she persists in wanting the name and date changed on the plat without doing additional courthouse and field work, ask him or her if they would be willing to change the name and update the date on their 2013 title certification without updating the title research in the courthouse?  Ask them if they would be willing to take a copy of the 2013 security deed, change the name of the lending institution as grantee, update the date on that document, and procure a refinance based on it, without updating the title research in the courthouse?  Ask the title insurance company if they would go along with any of this (the ALTA plat “revised” as to name and date, the title certification “revised” as to name and date, or the security deed “revised” as to name and date, without any additional courthouse research or field work performed)?

         An additional precaution that might be taken is to get a signed release from Bank ABC for any liability for the survey if the name on the plat is changed to Bank XYZ.