Page 10 - ESS FALL 2023-2
P. 10

Continued from previous page

          On November 2, 2022, the Board issued a Temporary Cease and   2019-08-0007-00ENG
        Desist Order. Mr. Huxel did not respond or request a hearing in a   An investigation was opened following a complaint alleging the
        timely manner. On December 8, 2022, the Board issued a Perma-  respondent entered the complainant’s property despite repeated
        nent Order to Cease and Desist which ordered:          requests  by  the  complainant for  him  to  leave.  The  complainant
          That Mr. Huxel shall permanently cease and desist from the un-  showed the respondent two previous surveys which contradicted
        licensed practice of land surveying and engineering in the state of   the location the respondent wanted to place his monuments. He
        Washington.                                            told the respondent that the nominal width of his waterfront prop-
                                                               erty is 40 feet, which he said the respondent wanted to reduce by
          Mr. Huxel shall not represent himself or his business to current
        or potential clients or the public, as being able to provide and/or   16 inches. Despite the demand to immediately exit the property the
        perform professional land surveying or professional engineering   respondent placed his monuments on the bulkhead in contradic-
                                                               tion with two previous surveys.
        services in the State of Washington. This includes; making any state-
        ment, directly or indirectly, to any individual or to the public be-  The respondent did perform a survey for the adjoining neighbor
        ing able to provide and/or perform professional land surveying or   to the south. Based on the respondent’s response to the complaint
        professional engineering services, until they file a Certificate of Au-  the monument between the complainant’s property and the re-
        thority with the Board, distributing any advertisement or offering   spondent’s client’s property to the south was set with permission
        that suggests the Respondent’s officers or employees can provide   from the complainant in the presences of law enforcement officials.
        professional land surveying or professional engineering services   The respondent explained to the complainant that it was necessary
        and participating in any capacity in the dissemination of advice, es-  to set the monument on the seawall so that he can have reference
        timates, suggestions or recommendation to any individual or the   to refute the survey if desired.
        public where such remarks could be interpreted to convey the im-  After thorough review of the existing surveys in the area it was
        pression that its officers or employees are competent and conver-  determined that the same controlling monuments were not used to
        sant in the profession of land surveying or professional engineering.  survey the complainant’s property as were used by the respondent
          Mr. Huxel shall not distribute to any client or public agency any   to survey the property of his client causing the so-called overlap.
        document, including but not limited to letterhead, business cards,   The respondent recorded a new survey to provide clarity for the
        maps, or website references, which show either the firm, its officer,   previously recorded survey. The AROS now contains a survey narra-
        and/or employees, offering professional land surveying or profes-  tive that explains the complexities of surveying in the area and the
        sional engineering activities.                         different monuments and methods used by surveyors over the years.
          Pursuant to the terms of the Temporary Cease and Desist Order   The case manager recommended the case be closed following a
        entered on November 2, 2022, the Board imposed a thirty thousand   letter of education to the respondent.
        dollar ($30,000.00 (U.S.)) fine against Mr. Huxel.
        Land Surveying:                                        2020-11-1678-00LSV
        2018-07-0004-00ENG                                       An investigation was opened following a complaint alleging the
                                                               respondent had set property corners in error. That error caused a
          An investigation was opened based on a complaint alleging a li-  dispute between the complainant and their neighbor regarding
        censed land surveyor had approximately 18 items on a survey that   logging services. The complainant alleged those property corners
        were in violation with Chapter 58.09 RCW, Chapter 196-27A WAC,   set in error caused logging activity to be outside of the intended
        and Chapter 332-130 WAC.                               area and onto private property.
          The respondent admitted to making errors on the survey due to   The survey field work was performed under the direction of the
        rushing to get the survey completed due to a pending real estate   respondent prior to the logging activity. The respondent provided
        closing. The respondent filed an Amended Record of Survey (AROS)   supporting information that explained the scope of his work for his
        correcting the errors.                                 client and the basis for his survey. He explained that multiple con-
          Following successful remedial counseling with the respondent   trol points were set as part of his work and the points were physical
        on the importance of following the appropriate laws/rules, the case   markers identified as survey control points.
        manager recommended the case be closed.                  A preliminary survey map was provided to the Board by the re-
        2019-01-0005-00ENG                                     spondent. This survey map indicated property corners and monu-
                                                               ments placed as part of the work performed by the respondent. The
          An investigation was opened following a complaint alleging the
        respondent, a licensed land surveyor, slandered the complainant (a   survey also depicts roads and other physical improvements that
                                                               also existed at the time of the survey. Aerial maps were also provid-
        licensed land surveyor) in an email the respondent sent to one of
        the complainant’s clients.                             ed that depicted existing roads, dense vegetation (trees) and the
                                                               recent logging activity. County GIS information was also reviewed
          The email referred to in the complaint appeared to be at mini-  to understand the approximate location of parcel lines in relation
        mum unprofessional conduct.  The respondent attempts to get   to the aerial imagery.
        work by telling the potential client to hire him instead of the com-  The case manager determined from the information the activi-
        plainant. The respondent went into detail to explain his conduct.
        The complainant and respondent have a long history between   ty was performed by the respondent was only in conflict with the
                                                               complainant’s knowledge of common survey practices of marking
        them, but that history does not exempt the respondent from con-
        ducting business in an ethical manner. Both the complainant and   the property corners with separate materials versus control point
                                                               markers, which are used in the performance of conducting a survey.
        the respondent were counseled on their business conduct.
                                                                 The case manager recommended the case be closed with no fur-
          The case manager recommended the case be closed following
        the remedial counseling.                               ther action and the board approved the recommendation.
                                                                                             Continued on next page

         10                                                                                             F AL L 2 0 23
   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15