Results of the current poll: whether you own minerals or not, if you did, this is who you would prefer drill them (rounding):
- Whiting: 29%
- Continental Resources: 23%
- BEXP: 17%
- KOG: 8%
- Oasis: 6%
- Slawson: 4%
- Burlington Resources: 2%
- Other: 11%
First, we all agree that "everyone" should have a will. (A person with no heirs and no property may not need a will but a lawyer may disagree.)
Having said that, this is the poll. If you had minerals, would you want to pass them on to your heirs through the probate process? (For some reason, "poll daddy" won't let me get rid of that fourth choice ("other"), but maybe there is another option than "yes, no, it depends." But I can't imagine what.)
Everyone should have a will. All that means is that your property no mater how title is held (personal property jewelry etc has no title ) will go to the person or charity you designate and not be given out in accordance with the methods in state law for people who have no will.
ReplyDeleteProbate is not complex or costly or time consuming so long as planning has been done. Probate is reviewed by court (judge) to make sure any liens are satisfied and the law is followed. Probate is only done on property that has a title in name of decedent . Other property such as ins, stocks bonds goes to named beneficiary with no court Probate involvement. Personal property is just given by executor.
I agree completely, but the devil is in the details, particularly: "...so long as planning has been done." And "costly" is in the eyes of the beholder as it "time consuming." This whole post was started when I read a note that someone said his inheritance of minerals were "held up in probate." That could have been avoided. That was my point. But yes, everyone needs a will (except perhaps someone with no property and no heirs) and then he/she probably still needs a end-of-life/health directive.
DeleteFrom my perspective, I would minimize property that needs to be probated.
Interesting metric would be net earnings per acre in production adjusted for royalty interest differences if significant by operator. Especially if operators are in the same field. It would take significant research to come up with this comparative info.
ReplyDeleteIt will be awhile before we can do that. We are still in the first or second inning of the Bakken; we are still at one well/section in most areas (there are some major exceptions). In the better Bakken we will be getting 8 or more wells/section, but that will be quite some time.
DeleteIn the short term, we will start get some meaningful data when there are more wells of at least five year's production. But even that will be a problem since technology has improved, and procedures have changed significantly even after just two years.
Well , that's my point. There is insufficient info right now to base a decision on who is the "best" if the criteria is who gets the most oil out of the ground for the royalty owner. Also, There are many other factors not the least of which is lease terms .
ReplyDeletePlanning for a will that has property to be probated is no more complex than other means such as trusts.
ReplyDeleteIf a deed is "held up in probate" it is most likely due to liens or heirship issues. As far as cost and time, again if there are no issues (I e leins or heirship issues, the costs and time are not a big deal. I probated my fathers will a few years back, all it involved was minerals and the cost was a few hundred dollars and it took A few months. Also, if there are title issues, the only impact is a delay in payment (could be significant yes). Point being, do not assume private is a bad way to go. It can be but then so can the alternatives.
My elderly relatives with working interests in the Bakken have chosen to establish a "Family Trust" to handle the royalties. At this point in time, seems to be the prudent approach.
ReplyDeleteNothing wrong with trusts, they may or may not be right in every case. As is true with probate.
ReplyDelete