M&P BEING SUED / CLASS-ACTION SUIT AGAINST HALCON, M&P & CX

 

Hello everyone:

                         I have not posted anything on here before. I have always just read the comments of others. I thought I would just post some thoughts. After being patient for 8 1/2 months I still have no answers like others in the south east Mercer County area. Is Halcon going to be held responsible for their actions? Are they going to be made to pay for the contracts they signed for? How qualified is M&P when it comes to representing the landowners of group 4 against a company like Halcon with deep pockets. Will we get an honest effort from M&P or will they make it as short as possible and except less than what we deserve to mitigate damages on their behalf. I have just read, in detail, the civil suit against M&P by Terra Energy LLC. Now it seems to me that the landowners not only have to worry about being pushed around by an unethical oil & gas Co, but now we have to worry about the real motives of the law firm we have to represent us. Are they going to treat clients like they treated business partners? I think if given a chance M&P will come back to the land owners after any legal actions against Halcon with a bogus report how they couldn't do much and if we continue it will tie up our lands for years, of course due to a half hearted attempt at getting us what we legally are owed.

                        I only have this attitude after listening to M&P for 8 1/2 months tell us how important it is to stick together as a group but they will break up the group at the drop of a hat to sign a little chunk to this O&G Co and another chunk to a different O&G Co. This sticking together only benefitted them by having all of us available to them for whatever size of lease they could get from any other O&G Co. After seeing an E-Mail to Terra Energy Advisors LLC from Jack Polochak describing how maybe Terra Energy should  get some leases signed by an O&G Co that are less than desirable for landowners to make it look like A Co he was partnering up with was successful in the oil and gas leasing business. That just shows me that he will sacrifice his clients profits to improve his and his associates. I think everyone should read the Lawsuit especially the landowners of group 4. Maybe I am seeing this in a sinister way and I am just swayed by how the rest of the world does things these days. Here is the link to the Lawsuit. I would like to know how many other landowners see it the way I do.

MPLawsuit.pdf

Views: 34271

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

2z248p19vqnh9Permalink Reply by 2z248p19vqnh9 on February 12, 2013 at 3:05pm

The DOCUMENT...THE document. The Document?

Am I to understand that NOBODY (nobody?!) has a COPY of the 'signed lease document'?? - NO ONE?

THAT is crazy. Wasn't a COPY of the document provided to each & everyone upon their signing...heck - how about *BEFORE anyone 'signed' so that ALL individual LANDOWNERS could read & look over so they could DISCUSS between themselves (in smaller groups, or even just on their own - and with their families...). Didn't anyone ask for this document, so they could LOOK & READ OVER for themselves WHAT was in the writing of the lease wording?

HOW could you have a LEGAL DOCUMENT - TIED to 'your land'...and NOT have the document?...would ANY of you sign a 'mortgage agreement' without being able to have a COPY of the agreement?

The evil done with this situation would possibly be two-fold - BOTH CXmc2 -AND- Halcon...BOTH were wrong in this senario. And it doesn't matter if the landowners do or don't have the 'document' - IT should be accessible TO them - it holds their SIGNATURES, doesn't it? I guess I an 'lost' in what exactly IS taking place with this...or I'd somewhat hope so anyway. I am not understanding - DO the landowners HAVE/possess the LEASE DOCUMENT? -or- is it being 'HELD UP' by the CXmc2 & HalCON (hal*CON*?...hmm...I can't help the way they spell it...). It's rotten tomatoes. it is. 

If they DON'T have 'the document' in their hot little hands, they need to get that. Doesn't ANYONE in 'the group' have ANYTHING? Ask...someone's GOT to have SOMETHING, SOMEWHERE! ASK.

As one light lights another, nor grows less - so nobleness enkindles nobleness. Never give up, Never give up! Check out below...

--------------------------------------------------------------

www.economist.com/debate/overview/246    *This is *The Economist's (Feb. 2-8, 2013) 'online debate' from Feb. 5th-17th, 2013 (p.14/15)...AGREE -or- DISAGREE whether "This house believes that the benefits derived from shale gas outweigh the drawbacks of hydraulic fracturing." *Sponsored by Statoil*

2z248p19vqnh9Permalink Reply by 2z248p19vqnh9 on February 12, 2013 at 5:14pm

This is crazy...this is 2013 now. Maybe it IS 'beam me up Scotty' WILD WEST in the EAST here & now --- floating about in never-never land. Wait a minute...let me TRY to understand this (IF possible...) - the 'document(s)' in question are NOT the 'leases' of the individual landowners, but a 'SIDE-DEAL(?)' between CXmc2 & halCON? HOW is THAT even possible?

*...let me back up again - the 'reps' of the 'land owner group'...is this to say CXmc2, being the 'reps'?

IF this WAS an 'INTENTIONAL SIDE DEAL'...then it's absurdly understandable (but NOT 'excusable'!) that 'they' DON'T want this known, BUT HOW (HOW!) would an AGREEMENT between HalCON & the landowners not be honorable BY HalCON? - Isn't THAT who the 'agreement' was essentially BETWEEN - the LANDOWNERS & HalCON?

------------------------------------------?

OK, if I'm (trying to) understand this correctly...the 'nix' came between CXmc2 & HalCON?...BUT the LANDOWNER is bound by their SIGNATURE & AGREEMENT with HalCON?...

*SO: 'A' = landowner, 'B' = CXmc2, 'C' = HalCON...

'A' + 'B' = lease agreement with 'C' (hence agreement between 'A'&'C' - ???), BUT NOW...

'A' - hung out to dry = B & C 'secret agreement'???...

am I missing something?

Perplexing at best...tigers & lions & bears (aliens on unicorns!)....IF....keep your heads up, folks.

-------------------------------------------?

Did ANYONE get to 'see'/read this mysterious 'document'??? - at ANY time?...with everyone now having 'camera's in their phones' now...doesn't ANYONE even have a PICTURE of this document? It would be smart for these people involved on the 'WRONG SONG' side of this horrid event to ASK & INQUIRE of EVERYONE involved (being LANDOWNERS!) IF...ANYONE, ANYWHERE has ANYTHING - photographed, written down (concerning this...)...and then HOPEFULLY going from there.

OR...Fang F Fang, are you saying that it was TOTALLY SECRET the 'INTENTIONAL SIDE DEAL' between 'B'&'C'...then HOW could that in any way, shape, or form have ANY 'hold' on these people's 'agreement'? Boy, oh, boy. I really must be dense to not 'get this'!...I'm sorry, but I'm really NOT grasping this.

IF the 'mythical document' simply 'DOESN'T EXIST'...then HOW could IT possibly 'bind' the LANDOWNERS hands?

*The 'LANDOWNERS LEASE' between the landowner & HalCON' should be 'binding' between the LANDOWNER & HALCON, period.

IF there WAS indeed a 'SIDE DEAL' between the 'reps of the landowners group' & HalCON...THAT should have NOTHING to do with what was SIGNED between landowners & g/o co. ...boy, I REALLY must be missing something. ***MAYBE a CONVERSATION with that 'Jim-Tom(?)' character would be more understandable? (good thing I don't drink!)

As one light lights another, nor grows less - so nobleness enkindles nobleness.

MAYBE all the g/o co.'s should buy the building in Oil City that used to be the g/o 'exchange' building - catty-corner from the Shenango Museum of Art, Science, & Industry...? - just a thought...now used as a 'theater'? - all the world's a stage & we are merely players?!

Permalink Reply by James Brink, Esq. on February 13, 2013 at 2:30am

Yeah, but who was at the lease signings? Does anybody know first hand?  I had a client who went to one of the presentations and claims that there were long tables set up and the folks lined up to sign leases.  Was Halcon there? M&P? CX Energy?  Someone had to be taking these leases, am I right?  What were they told prior to signing the leases? 

Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on February 13, 2013 at 3:27am

I may be able to get you some information on that. I had two cousins who signed but am uncertain if they went to a "mass signing" or were mailed the leases. I do know that at many if not all of the M$P/CX meetings that representatives of M&P and CX were both in attendance and that an M&P lawyer was present. This is second hand information but I believe Jim Litwinowicz would verify that fact. I have no knowledge that anyone from Halcon attended the signings or any of the local M&P / CX meetings. If you would once again post your phone number or other contact information I will encourage my cousins to contact you. I have raised the issue previously whether M&P / CX has done anything to change their documentation to avoid a repeat of what happened with Mount Jackson 4. Mr. Dittrich's recent comment is that the question was asked and the reply was that they were changing nothing. See his post to this thread. I have no reason to doubt his assertion. I find that response by M&P as revealing and outrageous. 

Permalink Reply by Brett Allen Morgan on February 13, 2013 at 4:22am

I was at the mass signing just outside of Mercer in June. There were Looooong lines to get into the building. We had to pass through three different stations to finally get to the table where we actually signed the lease. No Haclon reps.... just M&P/CX people. We never attended any meetings prior. Just had some phone call conversations. Our situation is sort of unique as in the fact that we were in the process of having a defunct well on our property plugged and the lease for that well released. We were told by CX and MP that this would NOT be a big deal and our lease would be funded. I called almost weekly to keep them informed of the slow progress on getting the well plugged. Every time I was told no big deal..... if we received any notice of denial for funding from Halcon then we were to call MP right away and they would take care of it. All summer long I voiced concerns to MP that the Halcon's due diligence report and our old lease surrender would "miss" each other timing wise. Again I was told not to worry. Finally on September 6 our well was plugged and the lease surrender was recorded at the court house. Since I had not received any notice of denial to fund our lease from Halcon I thought we were good to go. I sat back and waited on the magic date of Oct 18...PAY DAY...... and I waited .....and I waited ....and I WAITED ......also during this time M&P were increasingly more difficult to get a hold of. Then.... on November 17th I get a notice of denial for funding from M&P!!! It took me 2 more weeks and several calls to find out why!! I wanted to know if the paper work got crossed up like I suspected or if there were some reasons that go waaay back that our title was not cleared. After relentless hounding M&P sent me all the documentation concerning the issue. Just as I had suspected the paper work HAD gotten crossed up. HAlcon's due diligence report was dated Sept 4.....our lease surrender was recorded on Sept 6!! I did not get really upset until I reviewed the paper trail and discovered this info was on someones desk at CX collecting dust in early September THEN sat on another desk at MP From October until November when they finally got around to letting me know. I was lead to believe that M&P were working on it and the issee would be resolved shortly with a funded lease. THEN it was Fricken January 23 when I got wind of the Meeting in Grove City HS and tracked down Jeremy from MP to find out that we were basically out of luck with the lease!! Mean while all my surrounding neighbors have been signed and funded by Halcon with  few ...very few signed with Shell. Alsoo right across the road just on the other side of my property line Halcon is putting in a pipe line!!! MP/CX said they would willingly let me out of the CX market agreement. Not sure what I will do. The only place I find any fualt would be MP/CX for NOT working closer with us sooner. I truly believe our out come would have been successful! So...any way ...there is my angle ...hope it helps and suggestions welcome!

Permalink Reply by Deven Dittrich on February 13, 2013 at 2:50am

Samuel: M&P/CX was asked at the most recent meeting at Grove City HS what changes they made made to their Letter of Intent and/or lease agreement to prevent this from happening again. Their answer: "nothing".  Their stance is that it was a fluke thing- they had done eight other deals in which their documents were satisfactory- and all of the blame rests squarely on the broad shoulders of Halcon.  They have no reason to think or suspect that this will happen again since it only happened once out of nine deals.  Needless to say, that was not the answer I was hoping/looking for....

Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on February 13, 2013 at 3:53am

Mr. Brink has asked whether representatives of M&P, CX, or Halcon were at the "lease" signings. If you signed with them, perhaps you can post that information. Actually there should be a number of readers of this thread who attended the "lease signings" who should have firsthand knowledge of who attended the "lease signing" meetings. The fact that M&P/CX said that they would not change any of their documentation to prevent future debacles like Mount Jackson 4 is outrageous. I think that answer  makes them out to be outright crooks.. Their strategy is apparently to sign up almost everyone. Thousands of acres are signed up and then an O&G company comes along and cherry-picks the best acreage. M&P gets paid millions and many landowners get the shaft! In Mt Jackson 4, if Halcon paid only 20,000 acres, M&P/CX made $3850 x 20,000 x .06 or $4,620,000. I invite Janice Hancharick or other representative of M&P or CX to post the actual number of acres because I believe it well exceeds 20,000. Hard to feel sorry for M&P / CX who are crying all the way to the bank! And the M&P /CX juggernaut rolls on! When and where is the next meeting??

Permalink Reply by Brett Allen Morgan on February 13, 2013 at 4:38am

Sam,

I posted an answer about the lease signings...look back on pg 7 of this thread

Permalink Reply by Brett Allen Morgan on February 13, 2013 at 5:20am

Fang,

I am heavily considering that. I am looking at my neighborhood and deducing that Shell may be the only choice left. I did speak with a Shell landman a while back before I knew I could get out of CX deal. Touched base with him recently nd he told me that Shell is on hold while waiting on budgets to come in. My other concern is I will have to actively seek out a lessee because all these companies are basing their hunt for ground to lease on old reports that show our land as HBP which it is NOT. I came to this conclusion because as recently as yesterday I am getting letters in the mail from people interested in buying my mineral rights.....something I am def NOT interested in...... and in these letters they state that they see that we have land that is HBP..... any thoughts on thought Fang....or anyone else....BTW I def appreciate all the intelligent posts from folks like yourselves on here

Permalink Reply by Brett Allen Morgan on February 13, 2013 at 6:30am

Fang,

I TOTALLY Agree! I merely put forth that info to illustrate my concern that our land is showing up as HBP on info O&G companies have because they are using old info. How often do they update their info on properties they are interested in...anyone??

Permalink Reply by Ragnars Repo on February 13, 2013 at 6:33am
Brett, I was able to get out of this agreement awhile back. I was holding out as long as possible on my small parcel and trying to get all my ducks lined up for my eventual signing. I was working with hilcorp, shell, and cx. Like a fool I took someone's word from cx to send in the agreement saying " it will just get the ball rolling." I used an attorney and signed with hilcorp through western land, it wasn't until after signing I discovered I was locked in with cx. It turned in to a couple month battle to get out of the agreement. I never attended any of their meetings but most of my neighbors did and signed with them. It was interesting because they never did show me a lease, they just argued about how great and landowner friendly it was. It was poor decision making on my part but I didn't understand how I essentially signed a lease without seeing it. Much like how Pelosi said we have to pass healthcare so you can see what's in healthcare. At any rate in worked out but feel free to send me a message if you need more info.
Permalink Reply by Brett Allen Morgan on February 13, 2013 at 6:57am

Thanks Fang!

Thanks John O!! BTW NICE Pelosi/health care bill analogy!! LOL!!

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service