HKIS LSD APC Part I Written Assessment common mistakes
HKIS LSD APC Part I Written Assessment · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Quoting a boundary dimension from an old plan or a neighbouring lease as if it were the legal boundary, instead of first identifying the instrument that created the boundary (lease, assignment, gazetted resumption, or Land Tribunal/Survey and Mapping Office record) and its controlling description.
Candidates memorize the technical survey procedure for re-establishing a boundary and then apply it to any question containing the word 'boundary', skipping the prior question of which document governs. The habit comes from coursework that begins at the measurement stage rather than the title stage.
What to do instead
Before any measurement reasoning, write one line identifying the authoritative source of the boundary for the specific scenario given, and state why other sources are subordinate. Practise with scenarios where a lease plan dimension conflicts with a later subdivision plan, and rehearse the hierarchy you would apply and the record you would cite.
Treating a lease condition as a planning permission or as automatically extinguished by a later statutory approval, so the answer concludes that no lease modification or waiver is needed once Buildings Department approval is obtained.
The two regimes are taught in separate modules and candidates rarely see a question that deliberately crosses them. Under exam pressure the more recently studied regime (Buildings Ordinance approval) dominates the answer.
What to do instead
For every development-type question, produce a two-column check: statutory approvals required, and lease instruments affected. State explicitly that compliance with one does not discharge the other, and name the instrument (modification letter, waiver, short-term tenancy) that would regularise the breach.
Describing a deformation monitoring scheme only in terms of instrument precision (for example 'using a 1-second total station') without stating the reference frame, the datum stability assumption, the observation epochs, and the significance test applied to the observed movement.
Instrument specifications are the most memorable and most easily quoted facts, so they crowd out the design reasoning. Candidates also conflate precision with accuracy and assume a precise instrument guarantees a reliable movement detection.
What to do instead
Structure every monitoring answer as: purpose and tolerance, network geometry and datum definition, epoch schedule, redundancy and check observations, and the statistical criterion for declaring movement. Practise computing whether a stated displacement exceeds the combined uncertainty at a chosen confidence level.
Answering an ethics scenario by citing the general duty to act in the public interest and then recommending disclosure, without identifying the specific obligation owed, to whom, the client's confidentiality interest, and the proportionate escalation step that precedes any external report.
Candidates learn the code of conduct as a list of virtues rather than as a decision procedure, and exam answers reward visible moral language. The result is a conclusion with no reasoning path and no acknowledgement of competing duties.
What to do instead
Use a fixed four-step template: identify the facts and the professional judgement at issue; identify each party owed a duty and the content of that duty; identify the least intrusive step that could resolve the conflict (seek clarification, document advice in writing, refer upward); and only then state the escalation. Name the specific registration or ordinance provision where you are confident of it.
Presenting a setting-out answer as a list of coordinates to be pegged, without addressing the relationship between the design coordinate system, the site control, the grid-to-ground scale factor, and the permissible construction tolerance.
Candidates treat setting-out as coordinate transfer and forget that design coordinates are often on a projection grid while the tape and the excavation are on the ground. The scale factor and the tolerance are the two items examiners most often find missing.
What to do instead
For any setting-out question, state the transformation chain explicitly (design grid to local control to ground), quantify the scale correction at the site's location and height, and quote the tolerance from the specified standard or contract rather than inventing one. Then state the check measurement that would detect a blunder before construction proceeds.
Writing a survey report or expert-witness style answer that narrates the fieldwork chronologically and leaves the opinion, the basis for the opinion, and the limitations buried in the middle or absent altogether.
Fieldwork narrative is what candidates know best and it feels like evidence. They also fear that stating limitations weakens the opinion, when in professional reporting the opposite is true.
What to do instead
Adopt a fixed report skeleton: scope and instructions, documents and records relied on, method, factual findings with references to the record, opinion stated as a distinct numbered conclusion, limitations and assumptions, and sign-off with qualifications. Draft one page under time pressure and check that the opinion can be found in ten seconds.
Assuming that a class of survey instrument is accurate because it is calibrated, and omitting the field checks (residuals, redundant observations, independent verification of a known baseline or control point) that would detect a systematic error or a mis-set parameter.
Calibration certificates are tangible evidence of care and candidates equate them with quality assurance. The distinction between instrument calibration, observation procedure, and network adjustment is rarely tested in coursework, so it is rarely articulated.
What to do instead
For any accuracy question, separate three layers: instrument status (calibration, collimation, prism constant, level bubble), observation procedure (redundancy, face-left/face-right, closing errors), and network processing (adjustment, residuals, rejection criteria). State the acceptance threshold for each layer and what you would do if it were exceeded.
Answering a site supervision or safety question by listing PPE and toolbox talks, without addressing the specific statutory duty holder, the method statement and risk assessment for the actual hazard described, and the surveyor's authority to stop unsafe work.
Safety answers are learned as generic checklists and reproduced under time pressure. Candidates also assume the surveyor is a passive visitor on site rather than a person with duties under the relevant safety legislation and the contract.
What to do instead
Anchor the answer to the named hazard in the scenario, then state: who owes the duty, what the risk assessment and method statement must contain for that hazard, what the surveyor must verify before work starts, and the escalation route if the control is absent. Keep the generic checklist to one closing sentence at most.
Confusing spatial data management with file storage: proposing a folder structure and a naming convention as the answer to a GIS question, without addressing coordinate reference system definition, metadata, topology or attribute schema, positional accuracy statements, and version control.
Candidates equate data management with tidiness, which is intuitive and quick to write. The technical content of geospatial data governance is less familiar and gets skipped.
What to do instead
For GIS and data questions, answer in five layers: reference system and transformation, schema and topology rules, metadata and accuracy statement, quality control and validation checks, and access, versioning and retention. Give one concrete example of a validation rule you would enforce.
Ignoring the contractual and liability dimension of a survey task, so an answer about a delayed or disputed survey never mentions the scope of the appointment, the standard of care owed, notification of the delay, record keeping, or the limitation position.
Technical candidates frame every problem as a technical problem to be solved, and contract administration is studied as a separate subject that is not connected to the survey work.
What to do instead
End every case-based answer with a short commercial paragraph: what the appointment required, what was actually delivered, what notice or record was created at the time, and what the exposure is. Rehearse this paragraph until it takes under three minutes to write.