Frederick R. Ruffell
Senior Member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2002
- Professional Status
- Certified General Appraiser
- State
- California
You give him a call Frederick. I will be glad to supply the number. BTW, the legals we use in this part of the country are by metes and bounds. in Virginia we are not stuck with that God awful rectangular survey system you use in california.
I am much to busy teaching a class of 30 appraiser wannbes from 6:00PM to 10:30PM each night. Beside, i don't have to prove anything to anyone. As I state, we also have 2 unit condos where the entire condo is just 2 units. Now who do you think would own the land unless it is the 2 owners of the condo units?
As to note #1, it clearly shows that the UNIT(as in Condo Unit) footprint. The rest of the site is LIMITED COMMON AREA. Each unit owner is responsible for the maintenance, upkeep, cutting grass, driveway maintenance, etc as any single family property owner would be in a non condo. The unit owner owns the land under the footprint. And, no, i will not do a title search for you. If you really are interested I can recommend either a local Attorney or Title company who can do a search for you and explain it in more detail. Of course they will want to be paid. As for me, I am done. Got better things to do.
Sorry you felt that you had to prove anything Don, that was not my intent. I never said that the owners of condominiumds dont' own the land, In fact I was the one that pointed out that they do own the land, collectively. Then someone called my argument "semantics". So, IMO and experiance here in CA, the 2 unit owners have a 1/2 indivisable interest in the land and other common elements.
But thanks for your participation.
At this point I would have to disagree with you as to the condominimum project you have identified as each unit having an individual lot deeded to the property.
The plat states "Parcels numbered 1 thru 28 are for condominium purposes only and are NOT to be considered Lots as in a subdivision" Pretty clear...
Yes there is a "limited common element" around the designated units, could that be defining and "exclusive use" clause within the project and the identified unit a building footprint, all to show the setback and seperation requirements???
Again I don't know for sure without further evidence. Based on what you have provided us (thanks) I would say that individual, singular, and seperate ownership of lots is NOT the case here. I think that the assessor may have assessed the land in that matter as a mistake or for his convenience.
Good luck with the mind molding.