Hate to say this but Antero is the best to deal with. Just have to have all your ducks in a row when talking to them. Here is my lawyer (Dean) Frederick Rohrig (304) 758-2114. His fees are not bad compared to others.
That partition suit could be what might happen. I think that when several people own something in common, and one or more of these want to divide it (or sell it) and the others donāt, the ones who want to sell can bring a partition suit against the others and usually the court orders that everything be sold, or something like that.
Do you know details about the tract? and know others of the heirs (besides your sister and brother)? I know Antero is doing a lot of drilling in Doddridge.
I think you are correct that they need all the owners (heirs) to sign in order to drill but that the partition suit might be how they go about getting it done.
Do you live on the property? Sometimes (often) they can drill under a property and get what they want, and the property above the laterals isnāt touched.
A lot for you to think about.
The best, perhapsābut only when compared to their peers, all of whom have the exact same corporate policy when dealing with owners: āEither give us what we want on our terms or we will take it.ā Just because the government allows the tactics, that does not make the tactics just or morally defensible. It only makes the tactics ālegal.ā
Also unfortunately something to keep in mind that the oil and gas companies have not given up on Forced Pooling so perhaps in a year or two they will have another BIG tool to use to get what they want.
DT, thanks for posting this. A lot to read but it spells things out.
Not expecting anyone to change their opinion of Antero. They are sneaky, thatās for sure. A lot of people took the $1,200 and ran with it. Not smart at all. Now Iām confused on how much is a fair price. Itās up to $3,000 and 18% in Doddridge. But I read in a previous comment $12,000 and 20%. So Iām confused lol. I know Antero owes me and my family back pay since they were paying 12.5% that was signed by half of the family and the rest had no lease. My lawyer has our signed lease and is holding it until back pay is paid up. However, I may just tear up the lease and wait for more. My lawyer has 24 amendments. Previous posts only have a few. Donāt get me wrong, they are key ones. Need more though.
I posted this a few months ago and got it from another thread, links to lease ideas, specific to Texas in part but mostly good to know for everywhere. This all is complicated but even if you use an attorney it helps to have a good idea of what you want and donāt want in a lease. Mike is right that there is a lot more than is usually mentioned although he is also right that those are very important.
"Here are links to some documents about leasing, geared to Texas but general enough to help West Virginians: āHINTS ON NEGOTIATING AN OIL AND GAS LEASEā http://recenter.tamu.edu/pdf/229.pdf āCHECKLIST FOR NEGOTIATING AN OIL ANDā¦ā
Yes DT it was.
If you have a clause in the lease saying that if they pay you by mistake they canāt make you repay then you are OK. I am hoping to get that in my next lease whenever that is. I agree Antero should have checked further before sending out the lease.
Anteroās stated strategy is first simply to get the interests tied up to the point that no other company can get to them. They donāt need, from their point of view, to sort things out much beyond that to permit and get the ball rolling. They figure theyāll let others get the details sorted out later. The strategy of stirring up the nest among family members is simply a way to get the interest owners to fight it all out amongst themselves so that Antero never needs to sort the details out at all. It is part ādivide and conquerā and part ākeep them greedy so that the dollars talk louder than anything else.ā It works.
My understanding of a recent Supreme Court ruling (Tawney in 2007) is that producers cannot take funds out of the 1/8 of the royalties guaranteed to you. Chesapeake had to pay out millions to royalty owners in that case. I know that this practice is still in use and it will take further legal action to get it straightened out. You are guaranteed 1/8 percent of the profits in West Virginia. Not true in other states. Usually it is called post-production cost to build the infrastructure. That cost is to come out of the producersā funds. Royalty owners in Pennsylvania (and some in West Virginia) are really getting slammed with this. You are guaranteed 1/8 (12.5%) profit, no exceptions.
I know several people who would have been much better off with 1/8 and absolutely nothing deducted except taxes.
I think the way they can get around the court decision is the operator does not own the pipeline. Chesapeake spun it off to a subsidiary company and on theory Chesapeake pays the same 90% of value to move their product too, except they get a rebate, and still have an interest in the pipeline company so they make even more money from the mineral owner even though they donāt own the pipe directly. How do you think they paid off the massive loans that kept them afloat?
Like a guarantee on anything else, what good is it if itās only as good as your lawyer when you have to sue? Totally worthless until enough money is involved to make a long lawsuit feasible.
Courts have been inclined lately to disallow class action suits because the leases are not all exactly the same.
Sounds very familiar, DT! You must have the same landman we had.
I would ask the landman to explain this thoroughly. I know that mineral rights do not always line up exactly with tax map parcel numbers so that might be what is happening here. However, there is a physical area that is a tax map parcel number area, so the leasing companies need a physical location to reference (or they should) in the lease. Do you have a copy of the tax map to see how it looks?
Ok, letās start in on a new one from Antero, (at least itās new for me). Last year I signed a lease with them for 14 acres in Rock Run, Doddridge County, Central District, map 4, partial 23. Yesterday, I received a call from Antero, wanting me to sign a lease for 1 acre, same map# and partial. Now of course I have not seen the lease as yet so do not know how it is worded, but hereās my concern: if I sign this lease will I receive royalty (if that ever happens) for only 1 acre or 15 acres? Will the 14 acre lease fall through the crack? So this is what I decided to do: I will have Antero add an amendment to say: This lease for 1 acre map 4 partial 23 in Central District is in addition to lease for 14 acres same map # and partial # that I signed on Oct 1st 2013. What say all you smart people out there?
If the one acre was contiguous to the other lease, just an acre they missed in the first rush of leasing, I would want a new lease, but with the same effective date and expiration date, with the totality of the acres on it superseding the old lease and with language that acres not in a producing pool and paying royalty would be released at the expiration of the lease with the release to be recorded of record within 30 days of lease expiration, or words to that effect, consult your attorney.
Arnold, you can call the Assessorās office in Doddridge County and find out how to get the tax map or maps in the leases. Not expensive.
Nancy, thanks for responding. Itās confusing by a long shot. The acreage is a total of 72 acres, some in West Union District and some in Central. The first lease that I signed was a partial of 63 acres, that I own 1/4 interest, total of 15.75 my interest, and the second is for 38 acres but the lease is for 1 acre, both in Central, which to me means that the 38 acres was really chopped up as 1/4 interest of 38 should be a lot more than 1 acre, more like 9 acres. So when I get the lease I will find out more about this keg of worms. I do not have a copy of the tax map.
I know this was told b4. But whatās the term for them not taking there cost out of your mineral rights?
gross proceeds (instead of net) or cost free lease