Hi Robin, I think you said you had an API number for the well? For all 3 (the 1960 and the two from the 1990s)? I forgot the company handling that, not Antero. It is possible that there was enough of a gap between the last production of the 1960 well and the drilling of the first of the 1990s well for there to have been a lapse of the lease but I think that the sending and receiving of the royalty checks from the 1990s wells would be a legal activity keeping the lease active, or at least your cousins' activity of depositing the checks from the 1990s wells means that there is no basis for saying the gap in production, if there were a long enough one, to void the lease.
That would be a good question for your attorney when you start talking with one.
DT, I have an example of one person's handling everything for all the royalty owners and how it was a big loss for them when she died. This is Ritchie County. In 1899 a man died and willed a piece of property, 240 acres, to his 4 daughters. Soon they got together and divided the surface into 4 tracts of 60 acres each and 3 of them deeded to the 4th her interest in a tract, 4 deeds, so that each owned 60 acres surface alone but they owned the minerals on the 240 acres in common. After a few years one sister died, leaving her surface and her 1/4 of the minerals to her husband. He sold that to 3 men so that each owned 1/3 of the surface and 1/12 (1/3 of 1/4) of the minerals. One of these was my greatgrandfather. I found this in searching the index under his name, and saw this deed to him, but no deed where he sold it, and no tax bill on it as far as I have records (my mother's portion, to 1990). I started investigating. They sold the 60 acres surface almost immediately. There was a lease in 1930 signed by my greatgrandfather and the other mineral owners, and several wells have been drilled on this and a few are still producing. Current owner Viking. I kept tracing back and forward and found out a lot, and eventually found a tax sale in 1997 for all the minerals on this 240 acres, in the name of an heir of one one of the sisters. Digging more, I found she died in 1938 leaving her portion to a relative, then he left to another relative and sometime in the early 1990s I guess that one of his heirs forgot to pay the taxes, or maybe forgot to notify the county assessor of an address change, or of an inheritance. Anyway an O&G company became the proud owner of everything. When I was able to get to the courthouse a couple of years ago I looked in the assessor's records, which is a set of land books (in Ritchie there are several per year, by District) listing the taxpayer's name and address and the property he/she is taxed on. If there has been a sale or transfer through inheritance reported, that is noted on the listing for the taxpayer, and a new entry is made for the new taxpayer. It lists deed book and page, if there is a deed, etc. If no changes, then the assessor passes the information to the Tax office and they send out bills and collect payment. Looking around, it was listed in that last year before it was listed as delinquent, as the most recent heir but it didn't say anything about that person only owning 1/4 of the royalty. Looking back years and years I saw that my greatgrandfather was listed in the year he bought his interest, 1915, but after that it was listed in the one sister's name. Maybe she acted as everybody's attorney in fact in paying taxes and sending out checks. Anyway that is one way not only that one sister's heirs lost their 1/4 but the other sisters' heirs and the 3 men (including my greatgrandfather) who had purchased that portion. I am sure my greatgrandfather forgot about it. There is such a lag between buying (or inheriting) something, even with prompt filing of paperwork, and getting the first tax ticket. It is easy to forget that you haven't gotten your tax bill yet 2 years later, and if you move or die before the ticket comes and don't tell the assessor, you get "lost".
I like tedious detail! It took some time. But I really thought I had found some long lost royalty money in a suspense account and was really disappointed when I saw what really happened and how fairly recently it was.
Nancy I agree with DT, mind-boggling detail! How on earth were you able to track down all of this?
CNX is handling the lease, and they are the ones tracking down royalties on the two '90s wells. She should be getting back to me anytime. But I think I'm going to contact her early this week to follow up. I got an email from her last week, asking me if I knew the heir of my grandmother's cousin (the one that served as attorney in fact that passed in 1986). I did, but I passed her on to Antero's researcher, who had tracked that information. Thought that was more appropriate.
It would be something if after all of this, we found out that indeed, we weren't heirs after all ... the crack that my grandmother slipped through was more than just a crack ...
Nancy Mosley said:
Hi Robin, I think you said you had an API number for the well? For all 3 (the 1960 and the two from the 1990s)? I forgot the company handling that, not Antero. It is possible that there was enough of a gap between the last production of the 1960 well and the drilling of the first of the 1990s well for there to have been a lapse of the lease but I think that the sending and receiving of the royalty checks from the 1990s wells would be a legal activity keeping the lease active, or at least your cousins' activity of depositing the checks from the 1990s wells means that there is no basis for saying the gap in production, if there were a long enough one, to void the lease.
That would be a good question for your attorney when you start talking with one.
Nancy I agree with DT, mind-boggling detail! How on earth were you able to track down all of this?
I have API numbers for the two 90s wells, but not the one in 1960. Only the permit ID and responsible party ID. Its listed as abandoned.
CNX is handling the lease, and they are the ones tracking down royalties on the two '90s wells. She should be getting back to me anytime. But I think I'm going to contact her early this week to follow up. I got an email from her last week, asking me if I knew the heir of my grandmother's cousin (the one that served as attorney in fact that passed in 1986). I did, but I passed her on to Antero's researcher, who had tracked that information. Thought that was more appropriate.
It would be something if after all of this, we found out that indeed, we weren't heirs after all ... the crack that my grandmother slipped through was more than just a crack ...
Nancy Mosley said:
Hi Robin, I think you said you had an API number for the well? For all 3 (the 1960 and the two from the 1990s)? I forgot the company handling that, not Antero. It is possible that there was enough of a gap between the last production of the 1960 well and the drilling of the first of the 1990s well for there to have been a lapse of the lease but I think that the sending and receiving of the royalty checks from the 1990s wells would be a legal activity keeping the lease active, or at least your cousins' activity of depositing the checks from the 1990s wells means that there is no basis for saying the gap in production, if there were a long enough one, to void the lease.
That would be a good question for your attorney when you start talking with one.
Nancy, I don't have an API number for the abandoned well that was drilled in 1960. I wish I did. Maybe it was producing long enough to keep the lease valid. All I have is a permit ID, last permit date and responsible party ID.
Robin said:
Nancy I agree with DT, mind-boggling detail! How on earth were you able to track down all of this?
CNX is handling the lease, and they are the ones tracking down royalties on the two '90s wells. She should be getting back to me anytime. But I think I'm going to contact her early this week to follow up. I got an email from her last week, asking me if I knew the heir of my grandmother's cousin (the one that served as attorney in fact that passed in 1986). I did, but I passed her on to Antero's researcher, who had tracked that information. Thought that was more appropriate.
It would be something if after all of this, we found out that indeed, we weren't heirs after all ... the crack that my grandmother slipped through was more than just a crack ...
Nancy Mosley said:
Hi Robin, I think you said you had an API number for the well? For all 3 (the 1960 and the two from the 1990s)? I forgot the company handling that, not Antero. It is possible that there was enough of a gap between the last production of the 1960 well and the drilling of the first of the 1990s well for there to have been a lapse of the lease but I think that the sending and receiving of the royalty checks from the 1990s wells would be a legal activity keeping the lease active, or at least your cousins' activity of depositing the checks from the 1990s wells means that there is no basis for saying the gap in production, if there were a long enough one, to void the lease.
That would be a good question for your attorney when you start talking with one.
Ms. Mosley, the lease could possibly have become "at will" for those wells from the 90's. Definitely a question for a lawyer.
Nancy Mosley said:
Hi Robin, I think you said you had an API number for the well? For all 3 (the 1960 and the two from the 1990s)? I forgot the company handling that, not Antero. It is possible that there was enough of a gap between the last production of the 1960 well and the drilling of the first of the 1990s well for there to have been a lapse of the lease but I think that the sending and receiving of the royalty checks from the 1990s wells would be a legal activity keeping the lease active, or at least your cousins' activity of depositing the checks from the 1990s wells means that there is no basis for saying the gap in production, if there were a long enough one, to void the lease.
That would be a good question for your attorney when you start talking with one.
Robin you should be able to get that number from CNX. Then you could look it up in the WV OOG or the WVGES database to see production. More pertinent info for the attorney.
Robin said:
Nancy, I don’t have an API number for the abandoned well that was drilled in 1960. I wish I did. Maybe it was producing long enough to keep the lease valid. All I have is a permit ID, last permit date and responsible party ID.
Robin said:
Nancy I agree with DT, mind-boggling detail! How on earth were you able to track down all of this?
CNX is handling the lease, and they are the ones tracking down royalties on the two ‘90s wells. She should be getting back to me anytime. But I think I’m going to contact her early this week to follow up. I got an email from her last week, asking me if I knew the heir of my grandmother’s cousin (the one that served as attorney in fact that passed in 1986). I did, but I passed her on to Antero’s researcher, who had tracked that information. Thought that was more appropriate.
It would be something if after all of this, we found out that indeed, we weren’t heirs after all … the crack that my grandmother slipped through was more than just a crack …
Nancy Mosley said:
Hi Robin, I think you said you had an API number for the well? For all 3 (the 1960 and the two from the 1990s)? I forgot the company handling that, not Antero. It is possible that there was enough of a gap between the last production of the 1960 well and the drilling of the first of the 1990s well for there to have been a lapse of the lease but I think that the sending and receiving of the royalty checks from the 1990s wells would be a legal activity keeping the lease active, or at least your cousins’ activity of depositing the checks from the 1990s wells means that there is no basis for saying the gap in production, if there were a long enough one, to void the lease.
That would be a good question for your attorney when you start talking with one.
I emailed (separately) both the landman contracted by Antero and my contact at CNX, asking them for clarification about the lease. I had replies waiting for me this morning. They both said that there have been producing wells on the land, which has kept it active.
Regarding prior royalties, CNX also said that they have "made the transfer to us as heirs for our portion and once approved by her supervisor, the transfer orders will be mailed out."
I emailed CNX again, asking them for API numbers for all wells drilled on the property since 1960 (including the abandoned one in 1960).
More to follow as I know.
r w kennedy said:
Ms. Mosley, the lease could possibly have become "at will" for those wells from the 90's. Definitely a question for a lawyer.
Nancy Mosley said:
Hi Robin, I think you said you had an API number for the well? For all 3 (the 1960 and the two from the 1990s)? I forgot the company handling that, not Antero. It is possible that there was enough of a gap between the last production of the 1960 well and the drilling of the first of the 1990s well for there to have been a lapse of the lease but I think that the sending and receiving of the royalty checks from the 1990s wells would be a legal activity keeping the lease active, or at least your cousins' activity of depositing the checks from the 1990s wells means that there is no basis for saying the gap in production, if there were a long enough one, to void the lease.
That would be a good question for your attorney when you start talking with one.
Robin, as has been mentioned before, you can't take their word for anything. I would need to know which wells, how much they produced, who was paid. It's not even trust but verify, it's simply verify. If they won't provide such information and you can't locate the information yourself, I would not deal with them. If they are on the up and up, they should have no problem providing the information or pointing you in the right direction to find it yourself.
Robin, about the older well: if you have found the wells you already have the API numbers for on the map, you might find a well nearby with an earlier number. You could look this up in the database and see if anything looks familiar (your relatives as royalty owners, the company who was lessee on that 1960 lease). While you are waiting for CNX of course. Mr. Kennedy is correct that the company should be able to give you that information. I believe that CNX is an honorable company, having had positive dealings with them in the past. However sometimes when leases get assigned and paperwork gets transferred, some things get misplaced so getting what info you can is a good idea.
I had fun today looking for wells. I found three more .... I (think) I found the one from 1960, and I also found two others; one was drilled in 1910. Not much production from those older wells. I have the info from the ones that were drilled in the 90s and when CNX contacts me, I will compare what they give me with what I have. I was able to locate them using the WV Oil and Gas Pipeline database:
and send her the API numbers you have and she will send you plats, well maps, well records for a fee (maybe $5 a well). That will show you the area of the lease, sometimes with tax map and parcel numbers, often with surface owners of surrounding areas, as well as at least 1 royalty owner and surface owner where the lease is. Good info. If you are lucky they are all in the first link. Those are free.
For the pre 1929, there (usually) won't be an API number unless the old well has been reworked after 1929. Fascinating to see the really early numbers.
I was able to find the three older wells here ... even the one from 1910 ... but not the active ones drilled in the 90's. Lots of good info there, that went along with what I've discovered so far. I will ask Debbie to send me the info on those wells.
and send her the API numbers you have and she will send you plats, well maps, well records for a fee (maybe $5 a well). That will show you the area of the lease, sometimes with tax map and parcel numbers, often with surface owners of surrounding areas, as well as at least 1 royalty owner and surface owner where the lease is. Good info. If you are lucky they are all in the first link. Those are free.
For the pre 1929, there (usually) won't be an API number unless the old well has been reworked after 1929. Fascinating to see the really early numbers.
Ironic that you asked ... yes, I do have an update. A few days ago, I was able to talk to one of the other mineral rights owners, but the conversation was disappointing. Last fall, she received a modification from the same landman that contacted us. She said that she only has 1 acre interest. She signed and returned it. When I asked her about production costs, indemnity clauses, no warrant of title, etc., she appeared uninformed and disinterested. At one point she did say "that sounds like a good idea." She said that she also has mineral rights in Ritchie and one other county, and from them she received better offers. I would guess so, at the same time that she received hers. I asked her to please encourage the others to contact me (she knew of two, but didn't know if they had received modifications). She has limited contact with them. I was able to confirm the ownership of the surface and mineral rights of the property, so that was one good thing. And, she has been receiving royalties (not much) from the two wells that were drilled in the 90s.
She was given basically the same info from the landman (receipt of royalties could take up to 18 - 24 months from date of signing).
I am wishing and hoping that eventually, the others make contact with me.
She also confirmed that there is a lot of Antero activity in the area. One interesting bit of info was that she said that a cousin of one of the other heirs (not a relative) sold acreage somewhere in that area to Antero for several million dollars, but retained the mineral rights. This could be part of the land they wish to pool.
We are retaining an attorney (Kyle Nuttall of this forum). We are comfortable that he can represent our interests and concerns, given that we are so far away. Perhaps he can find out what the other mineral rights owners agreed to.
So ... interesting twist, isn't it? We out of state folks are the cautious ones.
Robin, Sounds like Antero bought the surface property to get infrastructure in that area.
The lady you talked to sounds like many folks who are clueless or just don't want to be bothered about their mineral interests. After all, it's only real estate we are talking about here??? A lot of the good ol' West Virginia folks are being taken advantage of by the low balling numbers that have been given in the past. The good ol' handshake is your word, is over with when you deal with these companies. Some people have stated they have did quite well and were very satisfied with their leases. I would like to see some of those leases, so I could compare them with some I have seen. I would find it difficult to deal with them over the phone or mail as you have been doing and envy you for doing so. I and others can't seem to get a good lease and we live right here. I hope you can get the lease and mods you deserve. Kyle is very helpful on these sites and we appreciate his input.