BRUCE D.

BARTON, PLS -LAND SURVEYING

3504 Trojes Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93313
Home Office / Fax (661) 412-4220 Cell (805) 258-8704

agosto 24, 2016

Via email: davidblakec@hotmail.com

David Blake Chatfield

2625 Towngate Road, Suite 230
Westlake Village, CA 91361
SUBJECT:

Land Surveying Services

Pacific Land Management
Canada Larga Road

Dear Mr. Chatfield,

Dear David,
I think I've been clear in that the County will need input into this project in light of the changing
circumstances on the ground.
Should my client choose to become engaged in the process, he carries more weight with his
local Supervisor or Representative in the district in which his project resides. It may be helpful to
have an informal sit down meeting with the Supervisor and County staff to discuss the process
for checking and approval by the County staff for the ultimate alignment. This simply puts Staff
on notice that this project would be a priority to see their portion of work through to completion
with minimal delays. If he attended the meetings it would carry more weight than I alone. They
wouldn't have a reason to deal with me, I'm not paying the taxes on the property.
The Supervisor/Representative can be effective in helping the process along so that my
submittals don't lay stagnant in the bureaucracy.
If my client wishes to retain political consultation for this project, then that's falls on him. It is not
extraordinary for a land owner to have contact with his representative when he has a project
within his Representatives' district. If the monumentation still existed in the field and was
accurately reported by available records, this wouldn't be an issue. This segment of work is
clearly not in my scope of work. However, without my input, you have nothing to go by.
I will submit detailed monthly invoices for work performed on the project. I cannot be held
responsible for something that is clearly an "Act of God". Any property abutting this "Fee Title
Owned Road" is affected by it's ultimate re-establishment.
Without re-iterating the changed condition due to rainfall and washout of monumentation, this
portion of the project would have been completed weeks ago. However due to my clients
/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/327668550.docx

unwillingness to realize the gravity of this "changed condition", we have been going in circles in
reaching a resolution.
The original "Not To Exceed" fee was proposed under different conditions in the field, which
clearly is not the case today. The fact that the County has not perpetuated their monumentation
is of no fault of this office or mine.
Let me put it in terms that your client can understand. This analogy is very similar except for the
trades involved:
If he were to bid on a job and was awarded the contract on a set of documents and/or plans
that were provided to him to estimate his fee, then starts working on the project and discovered
that the plans had changed completely and it would take 4 to 5 times the amount of effort to
finish the project and with the current contract he has would actually incur costs to complete the
project and would not make a penny in profit but spend thousands or hundreds of thousands
instead. I bet he would want to re-negotiate his contract or walk. I don't think a court would back
up the project developer for your client not fulfilling his contract based on the new plans.
I proposed on this project based on the stacks of county field notes for just Canada Larga Road.
I have identified only a few, none of which are in the area where you clients wants it to be
staked. In light of the fact that I discovered that the deeds do not fit the ground, and from what I
can tell at this point, could be 150 feet or more in error. Which really means, as I get deeper into
this project, the worst it will become and the more it would cost me. I can't afford to support his
project. There is already no profit in it for me at all, and not enough to cover expenses. I don't
like being taken advantage of and not being treated fairly or compensated in a proper manner. It
was already a reduced rate at the lowest end of my estimate, then he cut the hourly rate too. I
don't think anyone in their right mind would continue if: Firstly, they knew it was going to cost
them money, literally; Secondly, the dedicated time spent on the losing job means they aren't
making any money to survive on; and Thirdly, the economic difficulties multiplied with no sign of
relief. Would you continue? Under these type of conditions, I can't afford to continue without
extras or a different contract. Your client re-wrote my contract to his benefit, which I reluctantly
agreed to but based on all the information that was available to use. I have explained this many
times. You just don't know what you will run into until you get out there to do it. Your client threat
to "Put me out of business" is not well received. Clearly his intention was to screw me from the
very beginning. He even refused to change the contract to reduce my costs by paying for
printing cost. Where is the spirit of cooperation?
Maybe you should get some other bids on the exact same scope I have and see what numbers
you come up with. Then let me tell them what issues I know about now, I bet they wouldn't set
foot on the property, but if they did, their price would be at least six digits. Then we can discuss
something that would be more acceptable. Even if you do sue me, all those issues still remain
and have to be dealt with. It's just someone else will charge you a lot more.
Respectfully

Bruce D. Barton, PLS

/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/327668550.docx

/var/www/apps/conversion/tmp/scratch_1/327668550.docx