Tags:
Permalink Reply by LW on June 30, 2014 at 5:26am
Permalink Reply by Finnbear on June 30, 2014 at 5:35am If you sold voluntarily, you agreed to sell for the price you received, correct?
Permalink Reply by LW on June 30, 2014 at 5:58am
Permalink Reply by jason irvine on June 30, 2014 at 6:20am
Permalink Reply by Finnbear on June 30, 2014 at 5:33am Nothing needs to be "corrected". People who bought land that does not have mineral rights should have taken that into consideration when they purchased. They have no reason to be jealous now of their neighbors who are cashing in on the investment they made on property that does have mineral rights. You get what you pay for, and you should understand what you are paying for before you sign that purchase agreement. It is not the government's job to make it "fair" for those who chose to buy without mineral rights.
Permalink Reply by Renee E. Dorsey on June 30, 2014 at 5:50am But, but, Obama promised to make those rich fat cats pay their fair share.
Permalink Reply by Finnbear on June 30, 2014 at 6:29am What exactly does this have to do with my post above???
Permalink Reply by Renee E. Dorsey on July 1, 2014 at 7:13am Finnbear - it is a JOKE, grizzly!
Permalink Reply by jason irvine on June 30, 2014 at 6:26am
Permalink Reply by Patriots' Landing on July 1, 2014 at 1:42am The landowner who leases his rights gets compensated for damages (including potential loss of value). His neighbors, who also lose value but don't own the rights, get nothing. Seems like the oil companies should be responsible for damages to everyone affected negatively.
Permalink Reply by Renee E. Dorsey on July 1, 2014 at 7:12am That is the purpose of the court system - civil suit. It is NOT the duty nor the obligation of land owners who hold mineral rights to compensate for another's negligence, whether that be another individual or a corporation.
Permalink Reply by Finnbear on July 2, 2014 at 6:55am Those neighbors purchased that "loss of value" when they agreed to buy land where the minerals had been severed away. If someone thought the minerals were valuable enough to reserve them, someone else should have thought that those minerals might be developed in the future and figure that into the purchase price. They bought something that was less than whole and should have priced it accordingly.
tacoma7583 replied to David Cain's discussion 'In a Planned Unit - What should I do now?'
© 2025 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
| h2 | h2 | h2 |
|---|---|---|
AboutWhat makes this site so great? Well, I think it's the fact that, quite frankly, we all have a lot at stake in this thing they call shale. But beyond that, this site is made up of individuals who have worked hard for that little yard we call home. Or, that farm on which blood, sweat and tears have fallen. [ Read More ] |
Links |
Copyright © 2017 GoMarcellusShale.com