Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on July 23, 2010 at 6:04

That means 1/2 of the minerals are unleased. Who bought the lease?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on July 23, 2010 at 9:02

Cabot in Texas

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on July 23, 2010 at 9:12

Hardage, are you referring to the buyer of the lease or the buyer of the minerals? Both husband and wife signed the Mineral Deed, but only the husband signed the lease. On the mineral, deed the properties are described as recorded in the vol and page of the county deed records, with the catch all phrase that it is the seller's intention so sell all their mineral rights in the county (this is in fact all they own in the county).

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on July 23, 2010 at 10:16

Are you saying that you would not rercommend asking the company if they would like to buy a lease on the wife's 19 acres, which are now the mineral buyer's 19 acres? It could probably be bought cheap.......say........by adding a no cost royalty clause to the existing lease.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on July 23, 2010 at 10:21

I would think they might go with that. Wouldn't hurt to ask. If there is a warranty clause in the lease they may ask for half of their money back if the wife doesn't sign a ratification.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on July 23, 2010 at 11:35

Then the best thing to do would be nothing at all and let them drill a well. At that time I'm sure their title attorney will determine that they don't have a full interest lease.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Two Dogs, Pirate on July 23, 2010 at 11:45

SB was this a shale lease?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on July 23, 2010 at 20:52

TDP, the lease is dated 2009, after the Haynesville was discovered if that is what you mean by a shale lease. It is, in gereral, one of those very plain vanilla leases that strongly favor the Lessee. Has a 4 paragraph Exhibit A , with horizontal Pugh being the only one of significance. Hardage, I'm not too familiar with Texas....MIPA???
I am certain that Mineral owner will be very interested in leasing at very "reasonable terms" as his primary interest is getting a well drilled which the new mineral owner participates in. However, if the Operator is technically unleased on a portion of the minerals as a result of an error of Operator's Leasing Agent in preparing the lease with previous Mineral Owner, the new Mineral Owner has no objection of leasing anew, on very favorable terms, of course, maybe even free with the right Exhibit A.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Kat Bloomfield on July 24, 2010 at 5:35

Spring, I'd re-read and follow what Hardage stated.

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on July 24, 2010 at 5:42

Kat, I intend to do that, but I must first figure out where tio find the rules and regs of the MIPA. since I don't know what MIPA stands for. And thank you, Kat.

Permalink Reply by jffree1 on July 24, 2010 at 5:47

MIPA = Tx. Mineral Interest Pooling Act. Hardage is referring to a rule which states that "the interest owner must have made a fair and reasonable offer to pool".

This article explains the Act:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/134375/a_snapshot_pooling_...

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on July 24, 2010 at 5:49

Jfree to the rescue again!

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