Kodiak O&G retained Lone Tree to obtain a lease from me on mineral acres I own in Dunn county N.D. They sent me leases twice in 2007. I executed, notorized and returned both leases. As both leases looked identical to me I assumed the draft time limit had run out or some such. I followed directions both times and submitted both drafts to my bank for payment. Neither of the drafts were honored, but the lease was recorded both times. Dealing with Kodiak now, they tried to maintain that the leases were still valid. Lies of course, from their landman and VP of Land. No contract is valid without value on each side. It could be horribly lopsided, but 1 side can not be zero. Next came the lowball offers starting at $200 per acre and the original 18% to ratify the lease. A simple phone call on my part got me an offer of $2000 acre and 20% royalty from someone else. I consider it interesting that if you won’t buy a lie from one person, they get another person to tell you the same lie. They want me to talk to the CEO of Kodiak now. I feel zero trust at this point. I’ve had a generally bad experience with leasing and oil companies up to this point anyway. 300,000 barrels pumped from wells on my minerals, or pools in which my minerals lay, scattered over about a dozen sections, and not a penny yet. My current bone of contention isTwp 149 R 93W Sec24 N1/2. Looks like Kodiak has 8 permits for sec 24. Comments? Recommendations for an attorney advocate for mineral rights owner appreciated. RWK
Did you tell this "other party" that the property is subject to a signed lease recorded in the courthouse?? From experience, nobody is going to have much interest in leasing property that is subject to a recorded lease and potential litigation. You either have to get the lessee to voluntarily file a release of that lease or have a court do it.
Where did you ever hear that that Kodiak has 8 permits on any particular spacing unit? On or two maybe on a spacing unit, and any more than that may be physically located at the surface on that unit, but the laterals are going into adjacent spacing units.
Have you looked at it ? That particular other party is also a partner in the well. I would of course accept a minimal binding payment, with the rest due after I get the lease voided ten dollars should be enough. I have to hire an attorney anyway to work on something else. Unlike some companies; my word is good. A deal is a deal. Had I been paid, I would be silent now. I guess they can have a look at the notorized ratification agreement that Kodiak would like me to sign. Dusty, do you believe it’s ethical to record leases you haven’t paid for ? Is that the kind of business you do ? RWK
Dusty said:
Did you tell this "other party" that the property is subject to a signed lease recorded in the courthouse?? From experience, nobody is going to have much interest in leasing property that is subject to a recorded lease and potential litigation. You either have to get the lessee to voluntarily file a release of that lease or have a court do it.
Where did you ever hear that that Kodiak has 8 permits on any particular spacing unit? On or two maybe on a spacing unit, and any more than that may be physically located at the surface on that unit, but the laterals are going into adjacent spacing units.
I tried to edit and evidently it didn;t take. I wanted to thank you Dusty for making my point for me. " From experience, nobody is going to have much interest in leasing property that is subject to a recorded lease and potential litigation " . I couldn’t have stated my damages better myself. That’s why I was asking for a recommendation of a professional to help me. Thank you Dusty; even adversarially you made my point. Stop in again anytime. RWK
Dusty said:
Did you tell this "other party" that the property is subject to a signed lease recorded in the courthouse?? From experience, nobody is going to have much interest in leasing property that is subject to a recorded lease and potential litigation. You either have to get the lessee to voluntarily file a release of that lease or have a court do it.
Where did you ever hear that that Kodiak has 8 permits on any particular spacing unit? On or two maybe on a spacing unit, and any more than that may be physically located at the surface on that unit, but the laterals are going into adjacent spacing units.
"Adversarially made my point." Good grief. Please cut down on the caffeine. Did I argue, much less even say, that the lease was valid? I specifically didn't address the merits of that issue because we have only half of the story. We don't know why K contends the lease is valid, either because you haven't told us, or you don't know. I would say that is a vital piece of information, and I don't know how any disinterested party (like me or a judge) can comment on the merits if we don't know that info. Just because they offered a ratification doesn't mean the lease is otherwise invalid. I've signed ratifications for compensation because it dispenses with the hassle of litigation for both parties. Whether you want to obviously is up to you.
With your talk of "damages" and such, you make it appear that you have a court decision in your pocket providing you with clear title, and K now doesn't want to comply with that order. Instead, what we have is K saying the lease is valid and you saying it isn't. That's called a business dispute, and as I already said, you either need to settle with them, or have a court resolve it. I simply asked if you disclosed to the third party that you called that another party contends that your property is subject to a valid lease, which for some reason you didn't answer.
I've gone through comparable situations twice times during the last thirty years and never had a lease offer from a third party, even though they made the initial contact. After I explained the situation, they always told me to get back with them after my title was clear. That's why your statement about a lease offer peeked my interest. Now, you seem to imply that the third party offered some type of top lease that would take effect if you obtained clear title? I don't understand. Exhausting all appeals could take well over two years.
You specifically asked for comments, but apparently you didn't want anything substantive. I guess we could all hold hands and sing kumbaya instead if that's what you wanted.
r w kennedy said:
Have you looked at it ? That particular other party is also a partner in the well. I would of course accept a minimal binding payment, with the rest due after I get the lease voided ten dollars should be enough. I have to hire an attorney anyway to work on something else. Unlike some companies; my word is good. A deal is a deal. Had I been paid, I would be silent now. I guess they can have a look at the notorized ratification agreement that Kodiak would like me to sign. Dusty, do you believe it's ethical to record leases you haven't paid for ? Is that the kind of business you do ?I wanted to thank you Dusty for making my point for me. " From experience, nobody is going to have much interest in leasing property that is subject to a recorded lease and potential litigation " . I couldn't have stated my damages better myself. That's why I was asking for a recommendation of a professional to help me. Thank you Dusty; even adversarially you made my point. Stop in again anytime. RWK
Dusty said:Did you tell this "other party" that the property is subject to a signed lease recorded in the courthouse?? From experience, nobody is going to have much interest in leasing property that is subject to a recorded lease and potential litigation. You either have to get the lessee to voluntarily file a release of that lease or have a court do it.
Where did you ever hear that that Kodiak has 8 permits on any particular spacing unit? On or two maybe on a spacing unit, and any more than that may be physically located at the surface on that unit, but the laterals are going into adjacent spacing units.
Thank you for taking the time to reply, Dusty. K as you put it maintained for a short time that because I signed the lease and they recorded it it was valid, even though they had never paid the bonus. Yes I did tell the other party [ they are also a partner/working interest in this well ] that there was a signed lease recorded that was not valid. You can’t have a valid contract without value on both sides. As to the 8 wells; I never said they were all lateralling in the same spacing, Dusty. You said that! Is jumping to conclusions part of your aerobic workout ? I saw 8 wells referenced in section 24 when I searched the NDIC Oil and Gas Division website. I searched the section and 8 well numbers came up besides great grandpa Angus Kennedy’s well. I meant what I said about comments Dusty. I’m sure you have a great singing voice but I don’t really have time for singing. I also meant what I said when I said stop by any time. RWK
Dusty said:
"Adversarially made my point." Good grief. Please cut down on the caffeine. Did I argue, much less even say, that the lease was valid? I specifically didn't address the merits of that issue because we have only half of the story. We don't know why K contends the lease is valid, either because you haven't told us, or you don't know. I would say that is a vital piece of information, and I don't know how any disinterested party (like me or a judge) can comment on the merits if we don't know that info. Just because they offered a ratification doesn't mean the lease is otherwise invalid. I've signed ratifications for compensation because it dispenses with the hassle of litigation for both parties. Whether you want to obviously is up to you.
With your talk of "damages" and such, you make it appear that you have a court decision in your pocket providing you with clear title, and K now doesn't want to comply with that order. Instead, what we have is K saying the lease is valid and you saying it isn't. That's called a business dispute, and as I already said, you either need to settle with them, or have a court resolve it. I simply asked if you disclosed to the third party that you called that another party contends that your property is subject to a valid lease, which for some reason you didn't answer.
I've gone through comparable situations twice times during the last thirty years and never had a lease offer from a third party, even though they made the initial contact. After I explained the situation, they always told me to get back with them after my title was clear. That's why your statement about a lease offer peeked my interest. Now, you seem to imply that the third party offered some type of top lease that would take effect if you obtained clear title? I don't understand. Exhausting all appeals could take well over two years.
You specifically asked for comments, but apparently you didn't want anything substantive. I guess we could all hold hands and sing kumbaya instead if that's what you wanted.
r w kennedy said:
Have you looked at it ? That particular other party is also a partner in the well. I would of course accept a minimal binding payment, with the rest due after I get the lease voided ten dollars should be enough. I have to hire an attorney anyway to work on something else. Unlike some companies; my word is good. A deal is a deal. Had I been paid, I would be silent now. I guess they can have a look at the notorized ratification agreement that Kodiak would like me to sign. Dusty, do you believe it's ethical to record leases you haven't paid for ? Is that the kind of business you do ?I wanted to thank you Dusty for making my point for me. " From experience, nobody is going to have much interest in leasing property that is subject to a recorded lease and potential litigation " . I couldn't have stated my damages better myself. That's why I was asking for a recommendation of a professional to help me. Thank you Dusty; even adversarially you made my point. Stop in again anytime. RWK
Dusty said:Did you tell this "other party" that the property is subject to a signed lease recorded in the courthouse?? From experience, nobody is going to have much interest in leasing property that is subject to a recorded lease and potential litigation. You either have to get the lessee to voluntarily file a release of that lease or have a court do it.
Where did you ever hear that that Kodiak has 8 permits on any particular spacing unit? On or two maybe on a spacing unit, and any more than that may be physically located at the surface on that unit, but the laterals are going into adjacent spacing units.
Dusty, I am so glad you popped up again. Kodiak released the lease when I told them my lawyer had a open block of time to start the lawsuit and it was now or never. Evidently, the lease was invalid because I do not see them giving up the lease on a well that produced 150k barrels in 8 months voluntarily.
Dusty said:
"Adversarially made my point." Good grief. Please cut down on the caffeine. Did I argue, much less even say, that the lease was valid? I specifically didn't address the merits of that issue because we have only half of the story. We don't know why K contends the lease is valid, either because you haven't told us, or you don't know. I would say that is a vital piece of information, and I don't know how any disinterested party (like me or a judge) can comment on the merits if we don't know that info. Just because they offered a ratification doesn't mean the lease is otherwise invalid. I've signed ratifications for compensation because it dispenses with the hassle of litigation for both parties. Whether you want to obviously is up to you.
With your talk of "damages" and such, you make it appear that you have a court decision in your pocket providing you with clear title, and K now doesn't want to comply with that order. Instead, what we have is K saying the lease is valid and you saying it isn't. That's called a business dispute, and as I already said, you either need to settle with them, or have a court resolve it. I simply asked if you disclosed to the third party that you called that another party contends that your property is subject to a valid lease, which for some reason you didn't answer.
I've gone through comparable situations twice times during the last thirty years and never had a lease offer from a third party, even though they made the initial contact. After I explained the situation, they always told me to get back with them after my title was clear. That's why your statement about a lease offer peeked my interest. Now, you seem to imply that the third party offered some type of top lease that would take effect if you obtained clear title? I don't understand. Exhausting all appeals could take well over two years.
You specifically asked for comments, but apparently you didn't want anything substantive. I guess we could all hold hands and sing kumbaya instead if that's what you wanted.
r w kennedy said:
Have you looked at it ? That particular other party is also a partner in the well. I would of course accept a minimal binding payment, with the rest due after I get the lease voided ten dollars should be enough. I have to hire an attorney anyway to work on something else. Unlike some companies; my word is good. A deal is a deal. Had I been paid, I would be silent now. I guess they can have a look at the notorized ratification agreement that Kodiak would like me to sign. Dusty, do you believe it's ethical to record leases you haven't paid for ? Is that the kind of business you do ?I wanted to thank you Dusty for making my point for me. " From experience, nobody is going to have much interest in leasing property that is subject to a recorded lease and potential litigation " . I couldn't have stated my damages better myself. That's why I was asking for a recommendation of a professional to help me. Thank you Dusty; even adversarially you made my point. Stop in again anytime. RWK
Dusty said:Did you tell this "other party" that the property is subject to a signed lease recorded in the courthouse?? From experience, nobody is going to have much interest in leasing property that is subject to a recorded lease and potential litigation. You either have to get the lessee to voluntarily file a release of that lease or have a court do it.
Where did you ever hear that that Kodiak has 8 permits on any particular spacing unit? On or two maybe on a spacing unit, and any more than that may be physically located at the surface on that unit, but the laterals are going into adjacent spacing units.