Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Roy Austin Smith on August 10, 2012 at 9:48

No, i am not an attorney. Just a small land owner in Desoto parish , La. Have a small interest in about five wells. Paid off fairly good at first now the production is down and the price is down. I understand that, but i do not understand the difference in pay from Chesapeake and other companies. Brewster is the attorney.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ms.Dragonslaya on August 10, 2012 at 0:31

What about Exco?  I hope they have been treating us right, but now after reading these posts, I have my concerns.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LN on August 10, 2012 at 3:52

^^^Is anyone able to answer Ms. Dragonslava's question?

Anyhow, keep these comments coming.

We will get what rightfully and lawfully belongs to us and our decendents.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on August 10, 2012 at 7:06

Without specifics it's impossible to answer Ms. Dragonslaya.  Specifics in regard to the actions of operators and lessors are vitally important.  There are allegations with merit and allegations without.  I know it's hard for the layman to tell them apart.  However I advise restraint in assigning guilt without complete disclosure of facts.  The early days of GHS were rife with anti-industry rhetoric and it led many layman members to make poor decisions.  We don't want to go back to those days having come this far.  The sure fire way to run the contributing industry members off the site is to support a witch hunt that ignores the facts.  And create an toxic atmosphere where many avoid participation.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bill R on August 10, 2012 at 9:11

All of our family dealings with EXCO have been exceptional... First payouts and D.O.'s seem to take a little longer, however they have paid out all that is due without trying to nickle and dime so to death with extra charges or by keeping interest. While most of the others O&G companies are also like that, there are however several of the multiple companies we deal with that are not like that. We have two that are on the 'far side of the World' when it comes to their fair dealing practices and one other that I would like to meet the owner in a dark alley someday. That last one we are currently trying to take back our lease and make them cap the well they put in, even if it means taking our acreage off of the market to resolve it. 

BAD COMPANIES LEAVE A BAD TASTE IN YOUR MOUTH AND IT TAKES A LOT FOR THE GOOD ONES TO RECOVER FROM THAT FEELING!

I can say that if you do have problems or issues with anyone, the people on here can either help you or point you in the right direction. This site is problem one of the best things I have come across when it comes to dealing with O&G's!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Vernon on August 23, 2012 at 3:34

FYI - An interesting article.

"....The leaseholders also accuse Chesapeake of consistently underpaying proceeds due under their leases. They claim it has refused to correct accounting errors that “typically” favor the company, some of which the leaseholders said they brought to Chesapeake’s attention in October.

The leaseholders are seeking the outstanding proceeds due them, a full accounting and disgorgement of profits related to McClendon’s “preferential treatment,” according to the complaint. They also seek unspecified punitive damages.

The case is MDU Barnett LP v Chesapeake, 12-cv-2528, U.S. District Court, Southern District of Texas (Houston)."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-22/chesapeake-favored-ceo-mcc...

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on August 23, 2012 at 4:00

I wish them luck.  However I'd appreciate some comment from our O&G attorney members.  The lead attorney appears to have a practice focused on personal injury.  I hope he has some experienced O&G co-counsel.

http://www.provostumphrey.com/Attorneys/Thomas-W-Umphrey.shtml

Although it's a relatively minor aside I always wonder about corporations who are unable or unwilling to keep their registration current with the state Secretary of State. 

Company Name:	MDU-BARNETT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
Status:	Not In Good Standing	Filing Date:	04/06/2009
Entity Type:	Limited Partnership	File Number:	0801106928
Filing State:	Texas (TX)	Qualifying State:	Delaware (DE)
Company Age:	3 Years, 4 Months
Principal Address:	99 N Post Oak Ln Apt 1206 Houston, TX 77024-7722

 

Registered Agent:

Mdu Working Interest LLC 99 N. Post Oak Lane Suite 1206 Houston, TX 77024

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LN on August 23, 2012 at 10:03

Skip, it would be interesting to see what any O&G Attorneys have to say.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Brewster on August 23, 2012 at 7:11

Note Skip's posting - the plaintiff appears to be a "straw man" entity.  Just reading the article, it looks like an ambulance chaser's lawsuit.  My understanding, and it is not authoritative, is that Aubrey purchased a working interest in all of CHK's wells - there was no cherry picking.  Additionally, the broad general allegations of accounting errors that favor the company, and other actions that were unfavorable to plaintiffs is vague.  Those kind of claims are often dropped in an amended petition - sometimes rather quickly, and in other situations after some initial discovery.  I may be wrong, and will be interested to follow this, but it appears at first blush to be an attempt to exploit the uninformed outrage against the company in the hope that CHK will settle rather than fight.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by LN on August 23, 2012 at 10:05

Skip, it would be beneficial to see what the O&G Attorneys have to say.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 5
• 6
• 7
• Next ›
• Page