We received a letter today from Chesapeake asking to meet with us regarding our current lease with Belden/Blake (which Chesapeake recently acquired the rights). They stated that the terms of our present lease prohibit them from including our lease in their proposed unit and to take full advantage of "the benefits of horizontal development" the lease will need modified.. Several of our neighbors also received a letter. All of our old leases will expire next summer. Has anyone in this area received a similar letter and talked to them about "lease modifications"?
Denver... Can you please tell me where your farm is located. I have been receiving royalties for years from a unit named Gallentine #1. Just curious if we may share the same unit or units. Thanks...
Hi - Our farm is on Clay Rd (old Route 69) about 2 1/2 miles outside of Dellroy @ the top of the hill. In the early 1970's several farms in the area were pooled w/ ours and it was called "the Gallentine Unit". I assume you live near our farm. I live in New Philadelphia and my sister and brother-in law (Donna and Jim Locker) own much of the farm now. Since your land is in our unit we should all get together to assure ourslves fair treatment from the oil company. My e mail address is [email protected] Denver
Denver... has to be the same unit. I live in canton but do own the minerals to the lease. I have not heard from anyone to amend this lease. Have you been contacted as of yet? You can email me at [email protected] or you can call me at 330-904-3026. Here's hoping that the well in Rose township comes in.
They contacted me about lease modifications----and really, whatever is in your old lease, goes for whatever Chesapeke is going to do---I didn't have any issues with them----the man that I worked with is Ryan Mobley-and he seems to be OK. I'm sure there was a contact letter in what you received---. Again, I had no problems because my land was included in the units that have been currently leased.
Yesterday I "pulled out" the original lease that was dated 1967 for our family farm. I compared it to the one Chesapeake wrote and sent to us last fall (no one contacted us, no money given to us and we signed nothing w/ the new Amended and Restated Assignment, Bill of Sale and Conveyance). I noticed that the new one had new wording that didn't exist on original lease:1.2 (i) all the wells listed on Exhibit "A" drilled and completed in the Utica Shale Formation or currently being drilled to the Utica Shale Formation (the "wells") ...
My question is, "Can they unilaterally change the substace of the existing lease." I have read some comments saying that if original lease doesn't speacify depth a new one w/ payment should be writen.
In a word, NO.
See a GOOD oil and gas attorney - soon!
keep us posted on your progress.
Did you receive a signing bonus from CHK...or are you HBP from B&B lease?
Interesting question! If you your old HBP lease was sold off to some other O/G company, where they only bought lease rights to the shallow wells....and the seller reserved rights to deeper formations (utica)....would those reserved rights still be considered HBP?
1 company now owns shallow producing rights...other company owns deeper non drilled rights. Seems to me that if they separated the rights...HBP no longer applies to both formations!
We were never contacted and no signing bonus was paid. We were sent the Amended and Restated Assignment, Bill of Sale and Conveyance In the mail. It states: "...this Assignment is made by Chesapeake Exploration, LLC an Oklahoma limited liability company, Chesapeake Appalachia, LLC an Oklahoma limites liability company, Chesapeake AEC Acquisition, LLC an Oklahoma limited liability company, and Ohio Buckeye Energy, LLC an Ohio limited liability company (collectivly, Assignor) to CHK UTICA, LLC a Delaware limited liability compan ("Assignee)" It goes on to say for $10.00 and other good and valuable consideration. Futher it states 72% of all of Assignor's intrest in.
Somebody bought 72% of something that was once mine (as best I can understand) w/o including me.
The assignors (different divisions of CHK) you listed have owned the rights to this since the original lease was signed and they assigned a 72% interest to yet another division of CHK (the newly created CHK UTICA, LLC), keeping 28% with the original lessee. What is still yours is the landowner royalty specified in your lease. That can't change, no matter who or how they assign the balance of the lease.
I have already amended a few HBP leases which was for increasing the pooling acreage size and two of the Anchutz leases, also for the same reason. No new consideration was offered or given. I have, after a lot of consideration, decided to allow the leases to be amended or possibly never be included in a well unit/s. I hope that all others will follow because I believe that the attorneys are misleading the landowners whom are fighting the "right to renew" clause in the Anschutz leases. As much as I was hoping for a much larger bonus, I believe that CHk will not lose this fight. I know I have changed the original discussion but I hope that the "right to renew" discussion will continue.