Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on July 14, 2008 at 13:12

I'm so mad I'm replying to my own post.

They paid me about $50,000.00 in a bonus for property that would go for about 7 million (based on $25,000 bonus).
So what olive branch do they want to extend? They would like to pay me $25 per rod for a road r/w agreement when the going rate is $200 per rod. This gratious offer so that they can drill in another section. So that they won't have to pay that property owner timber damages and also pay for wetland mitigation.
The landman told me (and now documented in e-mail) that it is in my contract. I am not stupid enough to fall for this but there are many that may.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by insomniacnla on July 14, 2008 at 15:05

Did you have a "no surface rights" clause in your lease?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on July 14, 2008 at 16:30

Yes, I do.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by insomniacnla on July 14, 2008 at 17:50

If you have a "no surface rights" clause in your lease and it is written correctly, then the landman is not being honest with you. Tell the landman that you have read your lease and that your lease does not permit the laying of pipelines on your property. Period. I have had landmen tell me the same thing. They will lie to you about it and tell you that you have to allow it, then when they show up to work, they will say that you "agreed" to allow the work to be done and that it was done with your permission. You really, really have to watch yourself and make sure that this does not happen to you.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on July 14, 2008 at 18:02

Insomniacnla,
Thank you. I too have had a landman outright lie to me about a pipeline. I had to get an attorney for that deal and didn't come out much better than I would have on my own. They met with me, asked where I wanted the pipeline laid, etc. (I was surface owner only) Then they proceeded to lay the pipe where they wanted in the first place. I try to work with eveyone. I am not a big fighter. But enough is enough. I don't want to be run over.

It is all of our best interest to make this a win-win situation. But I feel like they think that they can only win if we lose. That is not the type of person that I am.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on July 14, 2008 at 18:03

Also please contact "Haynesville" and ask him to add a group for previously leased or large (100+ acre) owners.
THANKS.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Horace Manure on August 7, 2008 at 5:19

I have been offered $250 per rod, which works out to $13,200 per acre. I don't see why I shouldn't get $25,000 per acre just like the mineral owners are getting. Just a thought.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on August 7, 2008 at 5:37

How do you come up with $13,200 per acre at $250 per rod?
A rod is only a measurement of length isn't it? An acre square only has 208.71 feet to a side or not quite 13 rods doesn't it?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on August 7, 2008 at 22:06

Width x lenght = area, then divide by 43,560 to determine acreage.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on August 8, 2008 at 3:05

Yes that would determine what an acre is but when they say they will pay so much per rod, what do they mean? I am assuming if they cut across someone's land, they will figure out how many feet (length) that is and divide that by 16.5 to figure how many rods they will pay for. If they were paying for area (square feet), why would they say rods?
208.71 feet x 208.71 = 43,599.93 or pretty close to one acre. If they cut across that acre or 208.71 feet of it, that would only be 12.65 rods. 12.65 x $250 only = $3,162.50. Not $13,200! That would be enough difference to make someone pretty upset when they receive the check wouldn't it?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Bobi Carr ("parker") on August 8, 2008 at 4:40

Assuming that the lenght of 208 feet x 30 feet wide = 6240 feet would be the area being used.

I don't know if 30 feet is the correct width that is being quoted for anyone else. I guess it depends on whether it is for a road or pipeline r/w.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by P.G. on August 8, 2008 at 4:50

I had the impression that by the rod meant, by the running foot, rather than square foot. Perhaps I misunderstood.
It would be good to clearly understand this in the case they approached me about a row for a pipe.
I like the sound of the $13,000 figure over the $3,200 one! I'm just not sure if they would be figuring it that way!
I generally don't have such luck!

• ▶ Reply

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