Non consent as a partner in wells in Williams county North Dakota

Here is what was done to us by lessee Cody Oil:

Landman Luke Montieth never bothered to find our Utah 1998 Trust showing me as Successor Trustee, and he did find a Utah 2003 'will/trust', with my sister shown as both personal rep in the 'will' and as 'trustee' ,who has to deal with the personal rep, of a will that was devoid of any assets after it conveyed Mother's house by warranty deed to the 2003 'trust', thence to our brother in July 2006.Mother died 4/20/05.

Our 89 year old Mother had already conveyed the house to our brother by quit claim deed in 1999, but the Utah lawyer was happy to take her money for something our brother never even asked for.

Luke convinced our sister to sign the July 2009 lease as the 1998 trustee while living in Laos , and return it to him without being notarized, as it was holding up a huge block of tracts that he had already leased for drilling by Brigham/Statoil.

Our sister asked this brother, who did not even know that he was listed as secondary 2003 personal rep/trustee until this was revealed at a hearing on 1/3/13, to hand out the lease ratifications and checks for each heir, while,had Luke done his homework, only I , as Successor Trustee, would have ratified the lease in July 2009.

I did NOT return the individual ratification to Luke, but I did cash the check, as things had gone so far there was no way to fix anything.

The Williams county Recorder has no record of myself and another brother ratifying the 2009 lease.

The fact that Luke had each heir dealt with individually is proof that he botched the job.

I as Successor Trustee, should have ratified the lease as Trustee in July 2009.

Our sister and 2 brothers signed their individual ratifications.

Judge Rustad at Williston ruled on 1/3/13 that the empty 6/6/03 'will/trust' had revoked the 6/30/98 Trust that had owned the minerals for over 15 years,proving that 6 productive wells were drilled in 2011/2012 under a null lease, and the 2003 Trust should be allowed by some agency in authority to go non consent.

I need advice on how our 2003 Trust can go non consent and be partners in these wells, and any others that are drilled, in perpetuity.

Cody, who is shown as partner with Stewart Geological and Prolific Petroleum, can try to get the $200/acre that we received reimbursed to them from well proceeds, but a hearing before the Commission at Bismarck should settle matters about the status of them and partners in the fraud that was pulled on us Wagenman heirs, who elect to go non consent in the 6 wells.

Reply by r w kennedy 21 hours ago

Mr. Wagenman, if the false lessees want to recoup their $200 per acre I would be torn between having them admit their mistake and begging for their money back in a court filing, which I would consider a good thing and wasting my own time defending against their suit. I think I would consult your lawyer, who evidently has your best interests at heart, and follow his advice.

If you want to learn about being non-consent, you can search here because I have had quite a bit to say about it but most importantly you should read the law NDCC 38-08-08. read it several times and become comfortable with it then we can have a chat. I think it would be best if you start your own thread and hopefully a few others will join us. I think you will be pleasantly surprised. The prize? Last year, I saw an interview with the president of EOG who said that after expenses they made $60 a barrel off $100 a barrel oil. That's after paying someone their royalty. You would not need to pay anyone a royalty. how does $70-$80 a barrel after expenses for your oil sound as compared to $20 before taxes and post production expenses that might leave you $15 a barrel? Wild concept ,I know. Please start your own thread with a good searchable title for the thread.

Reply by Larry Wagenman 20 hours ago

Yes, It appears that non consent is the way to go, but the producers seem to be protected by the Commission.

So unless there is a royalty owner advocate or ombudsman that I may have missed seeing anything about, what are the chances of getting a fair shake at hearing?

Reply by r w kennedy 20 hours ago

I will take a wild guess and assume you are talking about a risk penalty hearing? If so there is no chance of avoiding the 50% of actual cost of drilling risk penalty and you will be charged dollar for dollar for surface equipment and operating cost. Since your first lease was declared invalid, that does not mean that the operator can't offer to lease you again and that would satisfy the good faith requirement. If you are made another lease offer and an offer to participate, you have 0% chance of successfully chalenging the risk penalty. My figures of $70 to $80 per barrel is assuming you have to pay the risk penalty and is an average of total production over the life of the well at an average at or near todays prices. If the price of oil drops by half, we are still talking about an amount of money you can't make leasing. I really wish this were in a new thread and I apologize for adding to the off topic clutter in this one.

Mr. Wagenman, you can start your own thread by going to the home page, mousing over forums and selecting any of the top 5 selections because we would be touching on all of them. Click on one of the top 5 and go to the threads, at top right there will be an add button. You can start your thread there. Please pick a title that will show up in searches using the term non-consent, North Dakota and so forth.

Larry Wagenman said:

Yes, It appears that non consent is the way to go, but the producers seem to be protected by the Commission, in which case, if they are allowed to offer a good faith lease of minerals from tracts already drilled and in production, mineral owners must either accept the offer, or stay non consent, which, as you explain, seems to be to our advantage long term.

So unless there is a royalty owner advocate or ombudsman that I may have missed seeing anything about, what are the chances of getting a fair shake at hearing?

Also,double posting is not allowed, so can I request deletion of what I entered on How to work with Well Operators, and leave it pasted it here in' Non consent as a partner in wells in Williams county North Dakota ' ?

Mr. Wagenman, I sent you a long private message composed while you were starting this thread. I hope you find it interesting. Since you have started this thread we can delete our posts in the other thread by clicking the blue X at the top right of the post.