Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on September 23, 2011 at 9:48

Yes it is legal.  The leased owners and the lessee have the right to realize production from their minerals whether all the owners agree or not.  Samson will apply for a SWR 37 exception due to the unleased interests and will produce the well.  That's why it is difficult to "hold out" on an undivided interest and expect a good outcome for the mineral owner.  Your options are to sign the lease offered or protest the exception and hire a lawyer to present your case to the RRC or you could remain unleased and hire a lawyer to try to use MIPA to force your way into the unit after it is completed.  That will fail unless you can prove that Samson failed to bargain with you, in good faith, to lease your minerals. It will also be very expensive.  Good Faith only means that they offered you materially the same lease everyone else signed.

 

I am not a lawyer.  You might need to consult one.

 

Permalink Reply by youngbird on September 28, 2011 at 9:39

Thanks for the response. But what happened is that I didn't refuse to negociate. I was out of town and had a change of address so I got the notice later than my relatives. We own all of the mineral acres on the tract of land and of course ownership is not differentiated among the mineral acres.I know Samson signed several of my relatives to well over 1000 net mineral acre leases. By the time I could respond the landman told me that Samson wasn't "leasing in the tract" anymore even though they had signed most of the nine owners to three year straight up leases. So, Samson rescinded their initial offer to me even though they signed my other relatives. If it is legal, it is certainly unscrupulous.Any more advice would be appreciated.

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on September 28, 2011 at 10:59

It is just my opinion but if I were in your shoes I would be talking to an experienced oil & gas attorney if I couldn't get a direct response from Samson.  Did you try calling the company to explain your situation?

Permalink Reply by Joe Petro on November 6, 2011 at 2:21

As far as I know, Samson is a company of integrity, and if you talked to them about what happened, they likely would work with you.  You might have to go directly to the company's in-house land department rather than to the independent landman you talked to.

Permalink Reply by youngbird on November 8, 2011 at 8:34

Thanks for your response. I haven't had time to really follow up on this yet. But I have to say integrity is not a word I would use to describe Samson. From my experience caveat emptor is the primary rule in negociating any mineral lease.I know from past experience that unless the mineral owners of a tract of land communicate with each other about lease amounts, the company isn't bound legally to offer each owner the same thing, and often they don't.

But as I said, this is a situation where Samson rescinded an offer they made, not one that I refused.That is what is troubling. Perhaps they intending to just sit on the leases, I don't know. But they paid a premium to do so.Has anyone heard anything else about a possible sale of the company?

To whom in the in-house land department would I address my inquiry and does anyone have that contact info?

I wouldn't mind consulting an oil and gas attorney, but it would depend on what a consult would cost.Anybody have any idea?

 

 

 

 

Permalink Reply by Krkyoldhag on February 3, 2012 at 3:23

Samson is a (or was until November 2011) a family owned business that has earned respect. 

The landman that worked with me from there is Alex Alexander.  You can call for him at Samson headquarters in Tulsa.  He is an upstanding young man and will guide you to who to contact about your problem.

I do not know how the company will function under the new owners KKR but since they kept the old management I am hopeful that it will continue to operate the same as always.