Reinstating a rural boundary where the fence does not match the marks
A 1970s rural subdivision of four lots is being re-surveyed for a boundary adjustment. The original deposited plan shows lot 2 as a 50.00 m by 200.00 m rectangle of 1.0000 ha. On site, three of the four original corner pegs are found, in good condition with legible marks; the fourth, the north-east corner, is missing. A new GNSS survey reduced to NZGD2000 gives 49.88 m along the north boundary between the two found pegs, 0.12 m short of the plan distance. An existing post-and-wire fence runs roughly parallel to the north boundary, 0.40 m inside the surveyed line, and has been in place since at least 1985. The adjoining owner has grazed to the fence since then and argues the fence is the boundary.
1. How do you determine the north boundary and re-establish the missing corner?
Read the worked answer
Original undisturbed marks define the boundary; the plan dimensions describe where those marks were placed, they do not override them.
North boundary. Both end pegs are found and undisturbed, so the boundary is the line between them - 49.88 m, not 50.00 m. A 0.12 m plan-to-ground difference over 50 m is a normal order of magnitude for a 1970s rural survey and does not justify shifting the marks. Shifting a sound original peg to fit a plan dimension is a serious error because it moves every dimension referenced to that peg and creates a new inconsistency.
Missing corner. Re-establish it from the adopted marks, not from the fence and not from the GNSS coordinates in isolation:
- Adopt the three found pegs as fixed.
- From the found south-east peg, run the original plan's bearing and distance for the east boundary to generate a position for the missing NE corner.
- Independently generate a second position by running the plan's bearing and distance along the north boundary from the found north-west peg.
- Compare the two. If they agree closely, adopt that position and mark it. If there is a misclose, examine whether it is consistent with the known 0.12 m discrepancy and distribute it in the conventional way rather than simply averaging or snapping to one line.
- Check that the result is consistent with the area, the opposite boundary and the adjoining lot, and record the misclose and the reasoning in the survey report.
The GNSS coordinates are used to express the result in the modern datum, not to define the boundary.
2. The neighbour says the 40-year-old fence is the boundary. How do you deal with that argument, and what would you check before responding?
Read the worked answer
The fence is not determinative. Under the land transfer system the boundary is defined by the deposited plan and the survey marks that give effect to it, not by occupation. Long occupation by the adjoining owner does not, of itself, move a registered boundary; adverse possession against a registered proprietor is heavily restricted under the current legislation. So the surveyed line stands.
But the fence is still evidence, and a competent surveyor does not simply dismiss it. Before responding, check:
- Whether the fence follows a different, earlier boundary, or a road line, or an easement.
- Historic deposited plans, the adjacent titles, and any boundary adjustment, agreement, or amalgamation condition that ever placed a boundary where the fence is.
- Whether the fence is a genuine occupation line or simply a stock fence set back for a track, a drain, or access - a very common reason for an offset in rural land.
- Whether the three found pegs are genuinely undisturbed, because the whole argument depends on that. If the pegs are suspect, the analysis changes entirely and the fence becomes more weighty.
The correct output is a survey that defines the boundary on the marks and a report that records the fence, its offset, and the reason it is not on the boundary. The boundary position is a surveying question; the fence is then a matter between the two landowners, and if the neighbour wants to pursue it, that is legal advice territory, not something the surveyor resolves by moving the line.
3. What goes into the survey report and the deposited record for this job?
Read the worked answer
The report must make the reasoning auditable, because the next surveyor to work here will find the same 0.12 m and needs to know what was decided and why.
Include:
- The marks adopted as undisturbed, how that was determined, and the condition of each.
- The observed plan-to-ground discrepancy of 0.12 m on the north boundary, and the explicit statement that the marks were adopted and the plan dimension was not forced.
- The method used to re-establish the missing NE corner, the two independent derivations, the misclose, and how it was distributed.
- The fence, its measured offset of 0.40 m, its approximate age, and the conclusion that it is occupation and not the boundary.
- The datum, projection, and the transformation applied to express the survey in NZGD2000.
- The accuracy achieved and the residual uncertainties.
On the deposited plan and CSD, show the adopted boundary, the new and reinstated marks, and the fence as an occupation feature. Do not draw the boundary on the fence line 'to match occupation' - that would create a false record and a future dispute.