Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by JHH on January 6, 2011 at 2:40

I've seen companies "correct" division orders occasionally.  Sometimes they discover problems after the fact and sometimes the mineral owners find them.  I'm always uneasy when i see corrected division orders... but i'm fortunate because family members are very smart about these matters and know what's right and what's wrong.  You'll need to also check with your local tax office because if the division order is changed... or incorrect.... the taxing authority will have incorrect information as well!  Hope this helps.  jhh

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by king john on January 6, 2011 at 5:14

thanks for the reply jhh. i hadn't thought about amended taxes, now that sounds like a head-ache. when i asked a few questions about this proposed amendment, the company rep. became irritable and combative  and finally said, " you don't have to sign anything", well, at that point i stopped listening. and i should mention, there is a list of clauses at the end of the page to which one agrees to upon signing...dirty pool if you ask me. 

kj

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by JHH on January 6, 2011 at 7:06

Unfortunately, you should suspect everything.  I'm not sure the Reagan approach... "trust but verify" works anymore.

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Elmore on January 6, 2011 at 10:45

What is their basis for adding the acreage to the unit? 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by king john on January 6, 2011 at 11:19

i couldn't get a straight answer. i was told that was a technical issue at one point and a survey issue at another point. then, that is when the person became irritable and told me i didn't have to sign anything...they are only trying to add 4 acres to a 600 hundred acre unit. it wouldn't make much of a difference in the overall division, but what i am skeptical of is the clauses at the end of the amendment. smells like bad fish to me !

kj

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by sesport on January 6, 2011 at 14:15

Monkey business?  80)

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Linda Whatley on January 6, 2011 at 18:21

Good point GoshDarn.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by king john on January 10, 2011 at 3:09

after giving this matter some thought, i have decided not to sign anything. i notice the decimal has already been adjusted and applied on my last three checks. it's the clauses that i believe is motivating this company, and oh, did i mention their name? encore/denbury/ whoever just bought them out. their office is the absolute worst RR, i have encountered. with that said, i don't have any leases with CK...lol

kj

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by benny688 on January 6, 2011 at 13:51

Not so unusual for me- old surveys are often corrected using GPS to get the most accurate results. A new survey can result in a shift of the division orders.

 

TXRRcom will eventually force a redistribution, but you don't have to worry about tax adjustments.  If you are in the positive you simply report this as royalty in the year you receive it.  If you come out on the negative side it will wash out with a smaller amount reported as royalties from the same producer on your 1099.

 

GLTA

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ben Elmore on January 6, 2011 at 17:31

It could be a legitimate issue. Taking Gosh Darn's point in mind, it may not be worth it to you financially to deal with the frustration of finding out. If it is, you should press them for a straight answer and it all depends who the company is as to how straight the answer will be or whether you will need to get a lawyer involved to force a straight answer out of them.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by adubu on January 7, 2011 at 1:41

King John-- I was told that the operator could add contiguous leased acreage anytime as long as total stayed within allowable unit size ie for gas 640+/- 10%. I had well drilled permitted as 40 acres and after well drilled the DO showed 480 acres in the unit because operator JV with another leasee contguous with their acreage. I ask operator and TRRC if there was deadline to add acreage and was told NO DEADLINE but must be contiguous acreage leased. The operator can get permit with minimal require acreage for field rules of the formation planned to drill and admend at any time with filing only at court house and not necessary on RRC site permit admendment showing data but will be in DO admendment to royalty owners

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by adubu on January 7, 2011 at 2:56

Mike R--- I think this maybe due to wording in your lease regarding pooling of your minerals-- maybe some of our experts on lease terms would like to comment and educate us on this issue.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page