The Developer Wants the Encroachment Omitted from the Plat
A surveyor is preparing a final subdivision plat for a 14-lot development. During field work, the surveyor finds that a neighbor's detached garage encroaches 1.8 ft onto Lot 7 and that a utility pole sits 0.9 ft inside the 20-ft rear utility easement. The developer asks the surveyor to leave the garage off the plat because the garage will be removed after closing. The developer also asks the surveyor to backdate the plat to meet a planning commission deadline and to sign for a technician who performed the boundary work but is not licensed. The surveyor's seal is required for the plat. The developer says the technician 'knows the site better' and that the surveyor can 'review it later.' The surveyor has not supervised the technician's boundary work and has not seen the field notes.
1. What are the surveyor's obligations regarding the garage encroachment and the utility pole?
Read the worked answer
The surveyor must not omit a known encroachment or easement conflict merely because the client finds it inconvenient. A final subdivision plat should accurately show improvements and encumbrances that affect the lots, including the 1.8-ft garage encroachment and the utility pole inside the easement. If the garage is to be removed, the surveyor may show it and note 'garage to be removed' only if the removal is a documented condition of approval or a binding commitment; the surveyor should not simply delete it. The utility pole should be shown or noted because it affects the easement area. The surveyor's duty is to the public and to the accuracy of the plat, not only to the developer. Concealing the encroachment could mislead the planning commission, the buyer, and the title company.
2. Can the surveyor backdate the plat or sign for the unlicensed technician?
Read the worked answer
No. Backdating a plat is falsification of a professional record and is prohibited. The date on the plat should reflect the actual date of the surveyor's certification or the date the plat was completed, not a date chosen to meet a deadline. Signing for a technician who performed boundary work outside the surveyor's direct supervision is also improper. The surveyor may certify work only when the surveyor has sufficient knowledge and control of the work, has reviewed the field data and computations, and can take professional responsibility for it. Signing first and reviewing later reverses that obligation. The surveyor should explain the licensing requirements and the risk to the public, and should offer a lawful path: review the technician's work thoroughly, verify it independently, and then certify only if the surveyor can responsibly do so.
3. What should the surveyor do if the developer insists?
Read the worked answer
The surveyor should refuse the improper requests, document the refusal in writing, and offer compliant alternatives: show the encroachment and pole with explanatory notes, obtain a revised site plan or removal agreement, and complete the review of the technician's work before certification. If the developer continues to insist on omission, backdating, or signing for unsupervised work, the surveyor should decline to certify the plat and consider withdrawing from the engagement. The surveyor should not let a deadline override professional judgment. Depending on the circumstances and Kentucky licensing law, the surveyor may need to report unprofessional conduct or a falsified document to the board. At minimum, the surveyor should keep a clear record of the requests and the reasons for refusal so that the professional decision is defensible.