CAPLIS-SLIGO ROAD RESIDENTS RECEIVE UNETHICAL BUSINESS PRACTICES IN REGARDS TO LEASING MINERAL RIGHTS!! ***note**** refer to tab "Discuss Haynesville Shale" and more replies are at this location.
In 2005 (and prior) my neighbors and I were approached by individuals affiliated with Chesapeake in regards to leasing our mineral rights for $100.00 per acre, etc. At the time, it seemed somewhat acceptable, I guess. It is somewhat strange the telephone number for the individual I dealt with in '05 has ignored my recent phone calls and the voicemail is full.
Now this is an eye-opener, get ready to be shocked.
March 2008; Weeks before we, the residents of N. LA received "breaking news" of the Haynesville Shale, my neighbors and I received checks via certified USPS for $100.00 per acre; note keyword "check" (not draft). Not only myself but many other residents owning property on Caplis Sligo Road accepted this little to nothing amount they offered. We, the residents were uninformed of local gas drilling and findings thus it seemed reasonable-- same amount as our last lease; nothing was thought of it.
We, the property owners in this area are disgusted and feel manipulated by Chesapeake's unethical leasing campaign. It is awful this company believes that the mailing of checks to reinstate your lease was conducted fairly and ethical. Without doubt, they knew they were ripping off people, sadly it was done intentionally on their part. Yet, this company- Chesapeake states they are "Doing the Nation a World of Good" to which is broadcasted all over their website. Now as I drive throughout Shreveport/Bossier, advertisements on billboards from Chesapeake states, " We are for the people." Hmph!
Apparently Chesapeake believed sending a check with a disclaimer printed on it, no additional paperwork included, was going to do our community a world of good. Once checks were deposited, lessor agreed to the prior lease agreements which apply for an additional two years. At this point, I am shocked I didn't receive a letter from their corporate office-- "Thank you for allowing us to deceive you in addition to ripping you off! We appreciate the fact you have a lack of education on mineral leasing... We certainly appreciate your business."
I am unaware if other companies participated in this unethical business practice, let it be known Chesapeake was! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know all the oil and gas companies which were popping up locally (approximently within the last two years) were aware of these "hot-spots" before it was made public in late April & May 2008. Who honestly believes any oil and gas companies would release their findings, making it publicly known within days after their discovery? We all know this event did not "go down" in that fashion, it was kept a secret as long as possible.
I spoke to a CORPORATE LEVEL employee at Chesapeake regarding unethical business practices utilized by "such a caring company." I received poor assistance and no explanation was given on why residents were not informed a month later. Coincidentally, it was made public once the deadline on the checks were dated. I also expressed my thoughts regarding their full intentions on sending out checks to individuals with "cash-by this date or voided" to ensure people would cash them. All in all, they win.
Perhaps they should post the comment their corporate employee stated on their billboards, "If we knew this was going to be as big as it is, we would have leased out to the entire area before other companies could have the opportunity." Hmm.. something like, leased out to people before they were informed of the Haynesville Shale for $100.00/acre! He continued to beat around the bush, informing me they were unaware the Shale in March. Throughout the conversation, it was obvious he felt compassion yet he continued to stand behind this seedy company.
I am now aware of Chesapeake's unacceptable business practices, including but not limited to taking advantage of landowners. It is sad to know that oil and gas companies are practicing unethical behavior to insure they will make millions while ripping off hard working American citizens not only in South Bossier, but the entire country.
I have contacted several attorneys in the area for legal advice, to my surprise they are all somehow affiliated with these manipulative, uncaring, useless oil and gas drilling companies.
PLEASE DO NOT MAKE THE MISTAKE THAT MY NEIGHBORS AND I DID.
EDUCATED YOURSELF ON OIL AND GAS MINERAL LEASING!
JOIN IN WITH YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP! DO NOT SETTLE FOR THE FIRST, SECOND.. NOR TENTH OFFER-- MAKE THEM PAYUP as they deserve to!
Any information on disputing a lease that was accepted by cashing a check would be very helpful and appreciated. Please let me know as I will inform my neighbors. Thank you.
Now this is an eye-opener, get ready to be shocked.
March 2008; Weeks before we, the residents of N. LA received "breaking news" of the Haynesville Shale, my neighbors and I received checks via certified USPS for $100.00 per acre; note keyword "check" (not draft). Not only myself but many other residents owning property on Caplis Sligo Road accepted this little to nothing amount they offered. We, the residents were uninformed of local gas drilling and findings thus it seemed reasonable-- same amount as our last lease; nothing was thought of it.
We, the property owners in this area are disgusted and feel manipulated by Chesapeake's unethical leasing campaign. It is awful this company believes that the mailing of checks to reinstate your lease was conducted fairly and ethical. Without doubt, they knew they were ripping off people, sadly it was done intentionally on their part. Yet, this company- Chesapeake states they are "Doing the Nation a World of Good" to which is broadcasted all over their website. Now as I drive throughout Shreveport/Bossier, advertisements on billboards from Chesapeake states, " We are for the people." Hmph!
Apparently Chesapeake believed sending a check with a disclaimer printed on it, no additional paperwork included, was going to do our community a world of good. Once checks were deposited, lessor agreed to the prior lease agreements which apply for an additional two years. At this point, I am shocked I didn't receive a letter from their corporate office-- "Thank you for allowing us to deceive you in addition to ripping you off! We appreciate the fact you have a lack of education on mineral leasing... We certainly appreciate your business."
I am unaware if other companies participated in this unethical business practice, let it be known Chesapeake was! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know all the oil and gas companies which were popping up locally (approximently within the last two years) were aware of these "hot-spots" before it was made public in late April & May 2008. Who honestly believes any oil and gas companies would release their findings, making it publicly known within days after their discovery? We all know this event did not "go down" in that fashion, it was kept a secret as long as possible.
I spoke to a CORPORATE LEVEL employee at Chesapeake regarding unethical business practices utilized by "such a caring company." I received poor assistance and no explanation was given on why residents were not informed a month later. Coincidentally, it was made public once the deadline on the checks were dated. I also expressed my thoughts regarding their full intentions on sending out checks to individuals with "cash-by this date or voided" to ensure people would cash them. All in all, they win.
Perhaps they should post the comment their corporate employee stated on their billboards, "If we knew this was going to be as big as it is, we would have leased out to the entire area before other companies could have the opportunity." Hmm.. something like, leased out to people before they were informed of the Haynesville Shale for $100.00/acre! He continued to beat around the bush, informing me they were unaware the Shale in March. Throughout the conversation, it was obvious he felt compassion yet he continued to stand behind this seedy company.
I am now aware of Chesapeake's unacceptable business practices, including but not limited to taking advantage of landowners. It is sad to know that oil and gas companies are practicing unethical behavior to insure they will make millions while ripping off hard working American citizens not only in South Bossier, but the entire country.
I have contacted several attorneys in the area for legal advice, to my surprise they are all somehow affiliated with these manipulative, uncaring, useless oil and gas drilling companies.
PLEASE DO NOT MAKE THE MISTAKE THAT MY NEIGHBORS AND I DID.
EDUCATED YOURSELF ON OIL AND GAS MINERAL LEASING!
JOIN IN WITH YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD GROUP! DO NOT SETTLE FOR THE FIRST, SECOND.. NOR TENTH OFFER-- MAKE THEM PAYUP as they deserve to!
Any information on disputing a lease that was accepted by cashing a check would be very helpful and appreciated. Please let me know as I will inform my neighbors. Thank you.
Views: 47
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Taken Advantage 71112 on
-
First let me inform you of definition of "unethical" -
adjective
not conforming to approved standards of social or professional behavior; "unethical business practices" [ant: ethical]
WordNet® 3.0, © 2006 by Princeton University.
If you believe that Chesa-fraud was ethical by sending these checks out right before the Shale was made public, I find that shocking. It is unethical due to the companies knowledge of their findings and having no intentions on informing "the people they care for" thus taking advantage of them. This company isn't only ripping people off in my area, perhaps you should browse more discussions topics. Karma, Karma, Karma!
My land is surrounded by drills and I have yet to receive a penny for my petty 1/6% royalties. -
-
Permalink Reply by Lin Taylor on -
Native has valid points. None of us know how much bigger the bonuses/royalties are going to get. We make the best deal we can with the knowledge we have at the time we sign. Worrying about someone else getting more will just make for unhappiness. There will always be someone who got more. There will always be someone who got less. Same as in everyday life.
-
-
-
AG, I have no worries on what other people are receiving, I have a problem with this company being seedy, misleading people, and lying. 100/acre is a joke and you know that! They rip people off and that's the bottom-line. Lets put yourself in my situation and I am sure you would have posted something a little more compassionate.
-
-
Permalink Reply by zmike on
-
For what it is worth I agree with Taken Advnt. As americans our congressman and gov. officials have been letting big oil and gas screw us before and after the fact. This is how the rich get richer and everybody else scraps by week to week. I don't know any private citizen that would have had the forsight(drilling their land for valuable minerals) to know about the valuable nature of the shale. Let alone the forsight to know natural gas would boom. My question is How is it ethical to pay one individual $100per/acre and another $30,000 located in the vicinity of each other? To me irregardless of a contract or not somebody has been intentionally mislead. How would you feel if you sold your house for$200k and then found out your neighbor sold the same exact home 2years later and got $200 million.
-
-
Permalink Reply by Skidmark on
-
Please give examples of "misleading" and "lying" on the part of CHK. The lessee is not obligated to voluntarily share all of its information when negotiating a lease. Did anyone ask CHK what the prospects were at the time the lease was signed?
Regarding the payment of $100 for extending by two years -- assuming that the right was in the lease, CHK would have been breaching its legal and ethical duties to its shareholders if it failed to exercise its option. -
-
-
well if gas co. is willing to pay 30,000 per acre I am guessing that their is still a huge profit margin for them. It's not an owners fault that chk has many millions to spend on research and development and we little people don't. I do agree with you that chk does have ethical responsibilites to it's share holders and that a contract is legally binding. I do think that it is fishy for their ceo to hoard their stock for the past 3 years( in other words he knew what he was doing) LOL!!!Later
-
-
Permalink Reply by Nighthawk on
-
AG you are correct in saying "we make the best dealwe can with the knowledge have at the time" but I have heard the State of Louisiana knew about this 2 years ago and never said a word about it.
-
-
-
Hmm--So your saying that CHK sent you a Check for $100 / Ac and by cashing the check you then executed the OGL? Was the OGL enclosed with the Check or did it arrive after you cashed it? Was the money sent in the time frame they agreed to send it?
This practice is quite common, However, look at it like this: At least you did not sell your minerals like alot of people do. I get calls all the time of people asking me about these letters with checks attached at the bottom. I always tell them that, "IF IT IS TOO GOOD TO BE TRUE, THEN IT PROBABLY IS.." in other words, if you get a letter with money enclosed , something is up and you better contact a professional that knows about these things and never settle for the first answer!....(Lawyers are NOT always professionals in this field!) -
-
Permalink Reply by Dion Warr, CPL on -
Taken Advantage:
This may not do any good, but I have to ask a couple of questions here:
Did you sign a lease in 2005?
Did you take their bonus consideration (present the draft, receive your money)?
Did the lease have the option for Lessee to extend the lease for a period of time by paying you on or before the end of the primary term?
Did they mail out checks to you prior to the expiration of the primary term of your lease in an amount equal to and as an renewal or extension payment?
If the answer to all of these questions is 'yes", then CHK did all that said that they would do. You are under lease.
Let's turn this around for a minute: If you and your friends had bought gold in 2001 for $275/oz., and had also bought a long-term option contract to buy gold at $300/oz., and in the meantime gold ran up to $1,000/oz., are you going to rescind your option contract, and buy it at $1,000/oz because that what other people are paying for it?
If you are like most people, you would call in your contract, and buy the gold at $300. You might even turn around and sell some yourself to other people (at $1,000, and not $300).
This is what CHK has done. I understand that it may leave a bitter taste in your mouth, but it's not unethical.
Three years ago, oil was at $50, and natural gas ran seasonally between $4-$8. Today, oil and gas spot prices are over double those prices. At that time, a HS play probably gains no traction. People regularly leased at these rates all over the Arklatex. How is it unethical for CHK to propose, and you to willingly accept such a deal that was similar to what everyone else received? -
-
Permalink Reply by Joan Williams on
-
In 2005 did you sign a 3 year lease WITH a 2 year option ? If so then Chesapeake did nothing unethical. They are just claiming their rights to the 2 year option you signed.
Sorry but just stating the facts. I know of soooooooooooo many landowners who chose to sign the same kind of lease you did. At the time it was a GOOD lease compared to years past. You could have chosen not to accept the lease in 2005.
The only one to blame is the person looking back at you in the mirror. -
Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com
Top Content
Not a member? Get our email.
Groups
-
Fishing and Hunting Group
110 members
-
San Augustine, TX
386 members
-
Miller County, Arkansas
27 members
-
Sabine Parish, LA
455 members
-
South Caddo Parish Group
440 members
-
Natchitoches Parish
400 members
-
Bienville Parish, LA
244 members
-
Fayetteville Shale
149 members
-
North Caddo Parish
358 members
-
Central Texas Gas
63 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
