Here's a hypothetical, although it could certainly happen. A midstream company your're leased with now wants to widen their ROW in a certain section. Not the entire ROW, just a portion. The landowner refuses because his terms cannot be met. This midstream could easily "take" this extra land without the landowner ever realizing it. How honest are these midstream companies? Has anyone dealt with dishonesty by them?
It's a miracle that you still own your ROW if you signed a ROW contract on your own.
You might want to read that ROW contract closely, most who signed that Canary Pipeline contract lost their Row after the 2nd pipeline was paid for.
One landowner lost his ROW when the landman changed the verbal agreement from payment on two pipelines to payment for foot of land in the Right Of Way. Or was that the Blue Jay Pipeline company.
Anyway the company had a bird in it's name, and I gave the landman the same when he left my the property. "You sign this contract, we don't negotiate", are you going to sign? All who did no longer have a ROW.
What do you mean by no longer own your ROW?
How honest are these midstream companies?
I got carried away and didn't answer you question.
I don't know, I wouldn't trust them to find out if they were honest and I figured out their scheme very early on that pipeline ROW contract.
Some people have had bad experiences, and I learned from them.
As most people who have had experience with O&G folks will tell you, trusting anyone in the oil and gas business is a bad idea. You have potential wealth and they know it.
Now if you were broke and lived on the street you might be able to trust them since you would have nothing they wanted. They might even be generous with you and put it in the local newspaper to show how they are helping your community.
How would they take without you realizing it?
If this is something you would be very concerned with, I would guess it could be monitored if you were willing to keep an eye on it? Either look for construction equipment or signs of digging, etc... I think?
Now, if this is a property you don't live on then it may be tougher to notice.
If there was a problem with them using more land than you agreed to, I would think it would be more straightforward to get it solved legally than other issues like Ron Hale's royalty issues... just because in this case there would be physical evidence that could be used. They either used more space than they should have or they didn't. They either buried one line like they were supposed to, or buried two or three. Etc.
Just my two cents. Never had to deal with ROWs personally. I think in a situation like this, the company would err on the side of adhering to the contract, just because, like I mentioned, there is obvious physical evidence/proof. I'd think it would be cheaper for them to obtain whatever rights they want in a legal manner.
The Hope Christian Fellowship vs Chesapeake Energy has physical proof provided by non other than Chesapeake Energy's Revenue Department.
You can always trust a companies Revenue Department, well, most of the time at least.
I guess I just mean a right of way situation might be easier to argue than what you are fighting. I don't know, I think that makes sense. Obviously better to try to avoid either situation in the first place.
Five of us us leased our mineral rights to Gastar. I've sense heard they were bought out. That figures. Anyway when we tried to SELL our minerals rights we were told by Gastar, although it was highly unusual, our rights have been "zeroed out." Huh? We're still paying taxes on it. Why haven't the taxes transferred over to the current, real owner then? I had a landman tell me sometimes large Gas companies just plow into a deal that sounds great, but sometimes make mistakes. They normally lose money on such deals if the title is not really clear. But an $8.000 mistake??? If I was Profit and Loss, I'd be head-hunrting for the company official who goofed that one. Especially with Gastar being in dire financial straights the entire time of our dealings with them.
Riddle me that. I'm Chris at: email@example.com
You should ask them to provide legal definition of zeroed out. That's a load of BS. It could be you are just talking with someone who is a complete idiot and doesn't understand the situation, but a load of BS either way.
'How honest are they?'
To me, it appears 'not very' at all.