Complaints

This profile includes complaints for Hogan Land Services, Inc.'s headquarters and its corporate-owned locations. To view all corporate locations, see Find Local Branches.

close

Find a Location

Hogan Land Services, Inc. has 2 locations, listed below.

*This company may be headquartered in or have additional locations in another country. Please click on the country abbreviation in the search box below to change to a different country location.

BBB accredited

Near

Country

USUnited States

Please enter a valid location.

Filter

• 

  Hogan Land Services, Inc.

  4780 Sonoma Hwy Santa Rosa, CA 95409-4237

  
• 

  Hogan Land Services, Inc.

  802 Estates Dr Ste 100A Aptos, CA 95003-3570

The complaint text that is displayed might not represent all complaints filed with BBB. Some consumers may elect to not publish the details of their complaints, some complaints may not meet BBB's standards for publication, or BBB may display a portion of complaints when a high volume is received for a particular business.

• Initial Complaint

  Date:03/10/2025

  Type:Product Issues
  Status:

  AnsweredMore info

  Complaint statuses

  Resolved:

  The complainant verified the issue was resolved to their satisfaction.

  Unresolved:

  The business responded to the dispute but failed to make a good faith effort to resolve it.

  Answered:

  The business addressed the issues within the complaint, but the consumer either a) did not accept the response, OR b) did not notify BBB as to their satisfaction.

  Unanswered:

  The business failed to respond to the dispute.

  Unpursuable:

  BBB is unable to locate the business.

  Hogan Land Services (HLS herein) hired in 2021 for expansion project for:calculating area Record of Survey, Lot Line Adjustment, designing the expansion Architect, Civil/Structural Engineers, Project Management to meet ***************** req's.Plans: V. 1 with wrap around deck submitted to County 12/2022. Comments from ************* were returned, noting Zoning setback req's to be checked. Next version (downsize, monies) was submitted 6/2024:it did not include a wrap around deck, at Hogan's suggestion, because somewhere along the line HLS neglected to check the notes from Zoning from the version 6 months prior, which caused a setback issue, so the architect and I spoke, and after he assured me this could be addressed at a later date, decided to leave that portion of deck out for now.(As to the space: I was informed of a 'it was right then, but now it's not right' type of explanation via email from the Surveyor. I questioned this, since HLS was in charge of designs, but also determining the Lot Line Adjustment to fit that design. *** offered to 'fix' the problem, but then wanted to charge me for it. That's when I filed the first complaint with ******, because I was not going to pay for work I already paid them to do (get the *** done right for the project).Upon receiving word of the complaint with ******, *** put a stop work order on my project. Concurrently, additional issues had arisen: *Foundation incorrectly assessed, resulting in spending over $11k on a design by HLS that was useless.*Lots not 'closed' after HLS survey of adjoining lots.*CEng adding notes to the plans to fix a retaining wall that is not part of this expansion project.*Zoning issue could have been fixed if only HLS talked to Zoning like my GC and I ****** word from HLS over 30 days, I hired an attorney.HLS is holding to an *** that I signed that sets liability at $15k. HLS waited to tell me of a problem after I spent approx $140k. NOT including damages, ***.

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/14/2025

  One of the main goals of Hogan Land Services **** (HLS) from the beginning has been to complete our clients project. *** halted work on their project after their complaint to the *******************************************, Land Surveyors, and Geologists (******). It is standard practice to resolve these matters prior to resuming work on a project. 
  
  HLS understands their frustration regarding the proposed deck. The survey completed by *** is not incorrect. The lot lines of their property and the adjacent property were identified correctly, and the new lot line was placed per their direction and marked for visual review prior to finalization. 
  
  The plans can be updated by revising the deck dimensions to comply with Santa Cruz County code 13.10.323(F) and incorporating, as necessary, the existing foundation. However, additional cost to expose and/or evaluate the existing foundation was not part of our original agreement. Site conditions, such as unexposed foundations, are beyond our knowledge and control. These conditions alter the original scope of work and are not a cost that HLS would bear. 
  
  Our proposal indicated that Hogan Land Services, Inc. would apply for a variance to the side yard building setback of 10 feet, to allow the proposed deck to be constructed within the setback. As stated in our proposal, this is a discretionary approval, and *** cannot guarantee approval.  
  
  Review of the timeline around the Lot Line Adjustment (LLA) indicates that our client provided HLS with a hand drawn sketch, received July 2021, see attached. The sketch indicates that the line was to be placed ten (10) feet from the edge of the existing structure. *** performed the required surveying tasks to obtain approval of the **** and on September 28, 2021 placed temporary stakes along the proposed lot line for review and approval of the two (2) property owners prior to completing and recording the **** More than a year later an agreement to prepare Permit Drawings was signed by the client and no mention of the original line placement was made to the Architect. As indicated in our proposal, HLS is prepared to apply for a variance to the side yard setback at our expense. 
  
  As stated in our proposal, HLS will complete the structural permit drawings and calculations at our expense. However, outside testing, construction, and/or contracting were not proposed in our original scope of work. There are unknown variables, such as the existing foundation discovered during construction activities, that HLS is not responsible for.  
  
  Construction costs are outside the scope of HLS work, as are the costs for outside consultants, moving and storage of personal items, along with equipment and/or materials needed or required for the project. As for legal fees and additional surveying, those were the clients decision and are their responsibility.  
  
  HLS feels that we have acted within our contractual obligations regarding Survey, Civil Engineering and Structural Engineering charges. *** is still willing to finish this project for the client, should they choose to proceed, or provide work done to date to another firm. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 03/16/2025

   
  Complaint: 23042706
  
  I am rejecting this response because:

  Although we appreciate Hogan Land Services response, we believe that they have not met their contractural obligations since the facts remain: we hired Hogan Land Services to have our house expansion to fit into this specific area. They were in charge of all of the design and survey/*** elements of this project, except GEO.  Being placed in a position to modify the design due to oversights by HLS by not checking Zoning issues earlier is disappointing, and has become expensive both in time and monies. We have already requested an extension for the permit once; we may need to apply for a second.

  The complaint filed with ****** is not a factor for companies to 'stop work', according to County of ***********************************

  As to the Lot Line: If we are to rely on hand drawings from clients, then we will refer to the following: Two hand drawings were sent, one showing 10', the other, showing 13' (sent to GF in June of 2021, attached).

  Regardless of hand drawings from clients, *** employees should have recognized the relation between the *** and the proposed structure. We relied on their expertise in the field, and hired them for that reason. 

  The Architect came on board Sept. 2021: in an email they stated:

  "Just letting you know I am going to be in *********** on Monday morning. I will stop by your place
  in the afternoon, or the next day, depending on the completion of the work being done at the other
  project.
  By then I should have all the answers in regards ******************** maximum building area,
  deck, etc. which will help us work on the design together."

  Their email message clearly show that they were aware of the elements involved: County Planning requirements, the area involved, the deck and the design.

  Dec 2023: first plans submitted. Put out to Bid; too expensive. Need to scale down.

  The designs were revised up until June 2024, when I was informed that the distance between the expansion/Lot Line are incorrect.  June 12, 2024: Email from Surveyor AR: "The measures where sufficient at the time. Now at this moment there are not." 

  It also seems that HLS may not have checked the County Notes from Zoning for the first version of plans submitted in December 2023, before the next plans revisions were drawn in June 2024, even after the first county ************ review clearly stated: 

  "1) Please include dimensions of the parcel to show that it complies with the approved Lot Line Adjustment (Application No. ******), and evidence to show that all conditions of approval have been met including proof of recordation of the required Deed(s) of Conveyance. 
  
  2) The subject parcel is in the R-1-15 zone district, please revise the setbacks shown as the Building Envelope on the site plan to reflect to site standards for the R-1-15 zone district.  These are:
  Front yard: 20 feet
  Side yards: 10 feet
  Rear yard: 5 feet.
  3) Please call out all setbacks from the property line to both existing and proposed structures on the site.
  4) The supporting posts on the western side of the rear decks appear to be within the required side yard setback. Pursuant to Clause 13.10.323 (E)(1) Structural Encroachments, balconies or decks greater than ******************************************************************************* rear setback. Therefore, all portions of any decks must meet the 10-foot side yard setback. Please revise the design of the deck or apply for a Variance to the site standard for side yard setbacks. An application for a variance to locate the posts within the side setback is unlikely to be supported by Zoning staff."

   

  As to the foundation: it is unclear why *** employee GF assessed the foundation as to be non existent during a site visit, then relaying that info to the architect ***** then HLS having to revise the plans, an additional $11k) only to have the ** challenge that finding by placing a camera through the side of the house, and then confirming his findings of a foundation at that same location. Emails attached.

   

  I have preferred not to have hired an attorney, but I did not see any other choice, since I was following the *** that we signed with Hogan Land Services; I thought that since I did not hear anything from HLS for over 30 days, that we would be going to mediation/arbitration:

  "26. DISPUTE RESOLUTION: The parties hereto will use their reasonable best efforts to resolve any dispute hereunder through good faith
  negotiations. A party hereto must submit a written notice to any other party to whom such dispute pertains, and any such dispute that cannot be
  resolved within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt of such notice will be submitted to an arbitrator selected by mutual agreement of the parties. In the
  event that, within fifty (50) days of the written notice referred to in the preceding sentence, a single arbitrator has not been selected by mutual agreement
  of the parties, a panel of arbitrators (with each party to the dispute being entitled to select one arbitrator and, if necessary to prevent the possibility of
  deadlock, one additional arbitrator being selected by such arbitrators selected by the parties to the dispute) shall be selected by the parties. Except as
  otherwise provided herein or as the parties to the dispute may otherwise agree, such arbitration will be conducted in accordance with the then existing
  rules of the ********************************. The decision of the arbitrator or arbitrators, or of a majority thereof, as the case may be, made in writing
  will be final and binding upon the parties hereto as to the questions submitted, and the parties will abide by and comply with such decision; provided,
  however, the arbitrator or arbitrators, as the case may be, shall not be empowered to award punitive damages. Unless the decision of the arbitrator or
  arbitrators, as the case may be, provides for a different allocation of costs and expenses determined by the arbitrators to be equitable under the
  circumstances, the prevailing party or parties in any arbitration will be entitled to recover all reasonable fees (including but not limited to attorneys
  fees) and expenses incurred by it or them in connection with such arbitration from the non-prevailing party or parties."

   

   As to the offer of continuing working with ***, I will be consulting with my team. Thank you.

  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***** *********

  Customer Answer

  Date: 03/18/2025

  Please clarify what information you need from me. If BBB is asking if I have an attorney, then yes, I have an attorney, but I have put their services on hold since I am now running out of money to do this project, thanks to this mess Hogan Land created.

  From the very beginning, all HLS had to say was "it's our fault, we will fix it no charge" in June of 2024 (this is something their rep ** also agreed with in the site visit in November of 2024), stating that their Surveyor "wasn't the best communicator").  Why they then continued to be casual re: the correspondence from my attorney afterwards is unclear. even after their Architect quoted the Surveyor saying "I Fu***d Up. 

  I am running out of money, and now the permit extension may not be able to be renewed with the county. After spending over $140k on this project, I have nothing to show for it, except a depleted bank account. 

  Thank you. 

  

  Business Response

  Date: 03/31/2025

  We did reply to the first complaint and attaching our reply again.

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/01/2025

   
  Complaint: 23042706
  
  I am rejecting this response because: I have been working with an attorney, but unfortunately we have not been able to agree on the issues. 

  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***** *********

  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/07/2025

  Please see attached letter responding to the rejection. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/11/2025

   
  Complaint: 23042706
  
  I am rejecting this response because: per email with Aspen B for clarification of terms. Please refer me to an 'enforcing agency' or 'arbitrator'.

  Attached are the payments made to ******* **** attorney in attempt to have HLS come to the table in good faith. Unfortunately we did not succeed. 

  Re-attaching General Contractors comments on the vastness of this issue.

  
  
  Sincerely,
  
  ***** *********

  

  Business Response

  Date: 04/18/2025

  Please find attached our responses. *** believes arbitration is the next best step as we are committed to resolving this matter promptly and fairly. 

  Customer Answer

  Date: 04/22/2025

   
  Complaint: 23042706
  
  I am rejecting this response because: this complaint has not been resolved; I will be filing with the ********************************* 

  Thank you.

   

  Sincerely,
  
  ***** *********