Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Les Bamburg on June 28, 2010 at 2:52

Flatlander, I concur with Henry's suggestion about sharing the mechanics of being an UMO/CIO.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by keb on June 28, 2010 at 20:32

flatlander, I agree with Les, please start a blog to let us know what your experiences were and all the details to make it easier for others to follow. Thanks

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Pam on July 1, 2010 at 3:47

I, too, followed the advice in Caliente's UMI document and finally received a drilling cost report. It lists totals paid to various companies and these expenses are lumped into broad categories such as consulting, leasing, etc. I guess a little peon like me will just have to pray the operator is deducting costs fairly ;o)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mary Alison Anders Knighton on June 28, 2010 at 12:06

I am no expert, but without a signed lease??? The company can do whatever..they have their own lease. Is it within your family or what? What is your situation? I am coming from Louisiana leasing basic knowledge. But a lease is a lease,seems you would have needed to sign something or to at least spoken with someone. Call them and ask, you have rights.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Harvey White on June 28, 2010 at 14:10

I am a home owner in Drew Acres subdivision. I have aproxamatly 4 acres in section 34 which has one well of which Samson contour is the operator. They came around about 4 years ago offering 150 an acre. Most everyone signed leases. I did not because I did'nt like the wording in the lease and they were way to eager to get me to sign. And something about the particular land man I just could not trust. Anyway, I have owned this property for 24 years and I own the mineral rights.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Mary Alison Anders Knighton on June 28, 2010 at 12:11

Records like these are public records...go to the courthouse.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kat Bloomfield on June 29, 2010 at 1:33

IMHO, these yahoos need to be careful. The UMO owns OWNS owns it's share of production. The operator does not. If it keeps it without escrowing that share, I ask--has it just committed felony theft?
The operator has title opinions. Title opinions it paid for and will try to deduct not only from royalty payments but also payment of UMO production share. It also has given notices per the LOC rules to obtain unit orders. Those notices are given to interested owners, including UMO. Yet these yahoos claim to require proof of umo ownership? Demand copies of the title opinions.
Frankly, each day of the BP disaster and the industry response makes me distrust O&G to the point I believe a separate police force should be in place. Never have I seen so much greed. That coupled with lease royalty deduct shenanigans, ie, deducts made in direct violation of express lease terms, convinced me this is the most untrustworthy industry.

Watch 'em like hawks
ride 'em like bad bulls
hit 'em with two by fours and baseball bats
and never ever turn your back

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on June 29, 2010 at 3:47

Yet these yahoos claim to require proof of umo ownership? Demand copies of the title opinions.


One would think the burden of proof of ownership would be on the driller, not the UMO. Why should they be allowed to harvest minerals without being required to make an effort to find out who they are harvesting them from?
Imagine a logger claiming to have rights to anyone's trees until the land owner provides proof that he doesn't..

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on June 29, 2010 at 4:54

Pay atention P.G.

The Operator wil have a title opinion and division order prior to making payments.

This will tell the operator who to pay.

The Well Permit and Unit Order give the operator the right to drill and produce. If your land is in the Unit, They have the right to produce those minerals and pay the appropriate mineral owner as per state law subject to the title opinion/DO.

Caliente is saying that if you feel you have been left out, ask to see the title opinion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on June 29, 2010 at 5:25

So then the driller has ran the titles and has an opinion on file of who owns what. Why then would they need proof of ownership from the mineral owner if their names matched up with his title opinions? I can understand there being a problem if one's claim didn't match the driller's research.
Forcing every unleased owner to hire a professional just to get paid or access to information doesn't seem fair if the driller is full aware of the claimants validity is all I'm implying.
From the original poster's post, he was being ignored.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by The_Baron on June 29, 2010 at 7:09

I have been involved with deals where people will com out of the woodwork claiming they own some minerals. Why should I bother with them if our title opiion does not include them. If they feel we overlooked or misssed somthing in the public record (which happens, especially in areas with poor records like certain counties in AR, or even in cases where records may have been lost or destroyed, several courthouses in louisiana haved burned, most notabally Vermillion Parish with a total records loss in 1885 and Plaqumines parish burned in 200, but I don't know how much was lost, but I digress....)

We tend to refer these claims to our title attorney, who usually explains why the title opinion is correct.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on June 29, 2010 at 13:12

PG if you are unleased then you are an unwanted working interest in the well. Why would the operators give you anything but the run around? What if you would participate in the well and pay your portion of the cost. Would not you also pay to run title before you spent the money? Would you depend on the operators to run title for you if you were fixen to fork out a hundred grand?

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 9
• Next ›
• Page