Lease indicates wrong section - GoHaynesvilleShale.com2024-03-29T09:17:45Zhttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/forum/topics/lease-indicates-wrong-section?commentId=2117179%3AComment%3A3802004&xg_source=activity&feed=yes&xn_auth=noDid you have any luck on gett…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-02-10:2117179:Comment:38020042019-02-10T16:40:41.838Zkittycatmamahttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/kittycatmama532
<p>Did you have any luck on getting this straightened out</p>
<p></p>
<p>Did you have any luck on getting this straightened out</p>
<p></p> Risk penalties are not applic…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-02-01:2117179:Comment:38003822019-02-01T06:44:14.767ZDion Warr, CPLhttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/DionWarr
<p>Risk penalties are not applicable to unleased mineral interest owners in LA.</p>
<p>Risk penalties are not applicable to unleased mineral interest owners in LA.</p> Those are exceptions to the r…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-01-30:2117179:Comment:37995412019-01-30T01:14:51.255ZSkip Peel - Mineral Consultanthttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/ilandman
<p>Those are exceptions to the rule. Operators regularly file Field Orders but not DOs. A Field Order is a public document, a DO is not.</p>
<p></p>
<p>Those are exceptions to the rule. Operators regularly file Field Orders but not DOs. A Field Order is a public document, a DO is not.</p>
<p></p> I have found several instance…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-01-30:2117179:Comment:37996972019-01-30T00:47:17.660Zkittycatmamahttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/kittycatmama532
<p>I have found several instances in Desoto where Operator filed Plat/ Div. orders for public record with all owners listed</p>
<p>I have found several instances in Desoto where Operator filed Plat/ Div. orders for public record with all owners listed</p> Louisiana operators do not fi…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-01-29:2117179:Comment:37996192019-01-29T19:50:49.071ZSkip Peel - Mineral Consultanthttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/ilandman
<p>Louisiana operators do not file DOs in the public record. The next best thing is a unit survey plat. Some, but not all, are entered in the SONRIS database.</p>
<p>Louisiana operators do not file DOs in the public record. The next best thing is a unit survey plat. Some, but not all, are entered in the SONRIS database.</p> Could not locate divsion orde…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-01-29:2117179:Comment:37996772019-01-29T19:48:22.857ZRONNYhttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/Ronny
<p>Could not locate divsion orders in conveyance records. not sure they even file them in the Parish records. Couldn't find them in the labyrinth they call Sonris either. Not enough hours in the day. </p>
<p></p>
<p>Could not locate divsion orders in conveyance records. not sure they even file them in the Parish records. Couldn't find them in the labyrinth they call Sonris either. Not enough hours in the day. </p>
<p></p> Did you find Chesapeake's Div…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-01-29:2117179:Comment:37995782019-01-29T05:25:40.116Zkittycatmamahttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/kittycatmama532
<p>Did you find Chesapeake's Division Order filing? If they have your seller who signed lease in right section then it will show gas company made a typo on your lease.</p>
<p>Did you find Chesapeake's Division Order filing? If they have your seller who signed lease in right section then it will show gas company made a typo on your lease.</p> The deed of acquisition and t…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-01-28:2117179:Comment:37990562019-01-28T16:33:37.647ZRONNYhttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/Ronny
<p>The deed of acquisition and the tax assessment both indicate the lot is in section 28. Also the subdivision maps filed in the court records have survey markings with the sections indicated and there can be no doubt the tract is in section 28. I believe I will pursue a Notarial Act of Correction to cure the error. Thanks.</p>
<p></p>
<p>The deed of acquisition and the tax assessment both indicate the lot is in section 28. Also the subdivision maps filed in the court records have survey markings with the sections indicated and there can be no doubt the tract is in section 28. I believe I will pursue a Notarial Act of Correction to cure the error. Thanks.</p>
<p></p> That is what I told Ronny. He…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-01-27:2117179:Comment:37990862019-01-27T01:25:23.200Zkittycatmamahttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/kittycatmama532
<p>That is what I told Ronny. He needs to go to Caddo Parish records and find the RECORDED Division Order. I think (not an attorney) that if they recorded the original owners with the lease in the Div. Orders in section 28, then that ownership should transfer. I bet that sec. 29 was just a typo in the lease.</p>
<p></p>
<p>That is what I told Ronny. He needs to go to Caddo Parish records and find the RECORDED Division Order. I think (not an attorney) that if they recorded the original owners with the lease in the Div. Orders in section 28, then that ownership should transfer. I bet that sec. 29 was just a typo in the lease.</p>
<p></p> WARNING: I am not an attorney…tag:gohaynesvilleshale.com,2019-01-26:2117179:Comment:37989312019-01-26T20:49:37.758ZDNicihttps://gohaynesvilleshale.com/profile/DNici
<p>WARNING: I am not an attorney or a Notary.<br></br> <br></br> From my reading of your post, I understand that you bought 5 acres in Section 28. Your title to this land is correctly listed as Section 28. However, when the previous owner signed a lease, he signed a lease that described the property as being in Section 29. This would mean that Chesapeake does not have a valid lease on your property: I am not an attorney but if they wanted to pursue it they could correct it.<br></br> <br></br> They apparently…</p>
<p>WARNING: I am not an attorney or a Notary.<br/> <br/> From my reading of your post, I understand that you bought 5 acres in Section 28. Your title to this land is correctly listed as Section 28. However, when the previous owner signed a lease, he signed a lease that described the property as being in Section 29. This would mean that Chesapeake does not have a valid lease on your property: I am not an attorney but if they wanted to pursue it they could correct it.<br/> <br/> They apparently are carrying you as an unleased owner. Request a copy of the division order for this section of property and you will probably find your property listed. As an unleased owner you would be entitled to your share of the operating royalties once the well pays out. However, depending on the circumstances, you could be required to pay double the payout amount before you receive payment.<br/> <br/> <br/> Since someone paid a lease bonus for this property but described it incorrectly you will need the original owner, or their heirs. to correct the original lease description. The notary is not required to be same notary. They are only attesting to who signed the document not whether the information in the document is valid unless they drew up this document. Since Chesapeake is the other party to the lease and there are no wells in Section 29, they may be uninterested in correcting the lease since it will require them to pay royalties.<br/> <br/> WARNING: I am not an attorney or a Notary.</p>