U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, Cary
 [Register]
Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, Cary The Triangle Area
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
 
 
Old 04-14-2012, 08:53 PM
 
3,155 posts, read 6,597,678 times
Reputation: 2043
Default Mineral Rights: who owns them?

The Herald-Sun - Builder sells homes without mineral rights (http://www.heraldsun.com/view/full_story/18181034/article-Builder-sells-homes-without-mineral-rights-?instance=search_results - broken link)

I'd like to keep this conversation local to the Triangle. In recent days there has been discussion in the media about DR Horton developments where home owners do not own mineral rights under there homes. DR Horton retained those rights when they sold those homes. We purchased a DR Horton home in Durham in 2007. It was built in 2005 thus we purchased it from an individual who originally purchased the home from DR Horton. I don't recall mineral rights being discussed at closing. But that was 5 years ago!

So my question is how do I easily determine if DR Horton owns the mineral rights under my home? I have the closing docs and briefly looked them over. The confusing legal speak made me dizzy. Is there a specific place that mineral rights would be mentioned. Or can I call the county of Durham regarding the mineral rights on my property.

Anyone else dealt with this? And realtors, would mineral rights need to be disclosed in the disclosures? If not it seems like going forward it's something that should be disclosed.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-14-2012, 09:42 PM
Status: "Support your Local Moderator!" (set 4 days ago)
 
Location: Cary, NC
18,938 posts, read 28,315,392 times
Reputation: 15627
New homes sold without underground rights spur fracking fears - Real Estate News - NewsObserver.com
Names two homeowners, the first who bought an Orleans home without exclusion of mineral rights, and the 2nd who bought DR Horton, with mineral rights excluded. The language is clear, although oft overlooked by the buyer in the closing procedure.

1st. Humberto Garrido's Deed as recorded in Chatham County:
http://www.chathamncrod.org/Document...040&Close=True

2nd. Brian Young's Deed as recorded in Chatham County:
http://www.chathamncrod.org/Document...085&Close=True


Having the SECU say they will not lend against the properties with mineral rights excluded is an interesting development for resellers.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2012, 06:10 AM
 
Location: Morrisville, NC
3,229 posts, read 2,683,030 times
Reputation: 2502
Seems kind of knee jerk for lenders not to lend against them, there's no additional risk involved and it's very common in other more mineral rich areas for this to be the case with almost all new subdivisions. What difference does it make to the lender if the homeowner on a .20 acre lot missed out on a few dozen bucks a year because some drilling rig is located maybe miles away? It's not even clear that there would be any real way to stop the drilling from occurring even if you had you mineral rights and did not want to lease them with the way drilling is being proposed to be done and three is certainly no way for someone to setup a drilling operation in any modern subdivision with an HOA. It will be interesting if a bunch of anti HOA people suddenly wish they were in one though, when a neighbor sells to allow a drill nearby.

We bought a home from DR Horton in 2006 and mineral rights are not excluded. I guess they had not thought of it yet.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2012, 08:46 AM
 
3,155 posts, read 6,597,678 times
Reputation: 2043
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherifftruman View Post
Seems kind of knee jerk for lenders not to lend against them, there's no additional risk involved and it's very common in other more mineral rich areas for this to be the case with almost all new subdivisions. What difference does it make to the lender if the homeowner on a .20 acre lot missed out on a few dozen bucks a year because some drilling rig is located maybe miles away? It's not even clear that there would be any real way to stop the drilling from occurring even if you had you mineral rights and did not want to lease them with the way drilling is being proposed to be done and three is certainly no way for someone to setup a drilling operation in any modern subdivision with an HOA. It will be interesting if a bunch of anti HOA people suddenly wish they were in one though, when a neighbor sells to allow a drill nearby.

We bought a home from DR Horton in 2006 and mineral rights are not excluded. I guess they had not thought of it yet.
Sherifftruman, can you share with me what part of your deed/ closing docs did you look at to know that your mineral rights were not excluded. I don't think ours were excluded (house built in 2005) but I want to double check. Thanks!
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2012, 08:47 AM
Status: "Support your Local Moderator!" (set 4 days ago)
 
Location: Cary, NC
18,938 posts, read 28,315,392 times
Reputation: 15627
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikeJaquish View Post
New homes sold without underground rights spur fracking fears - Real Estate News - NewsObserver.com
Names two homeowners, the first who bought an Orleans home without exclusion of mineral rights, and the 2nd who bought DR Horton, with mineral rights excluded. The language is clear, although oft overlooked by the buyer in the closing procedure.

1st. Humberto Garrido's Deed as recorded in Chatham County:
http://www.chathamncrod.org/Document...040&Close=True

2nd. Brian Young's Deed as recorded in Chatham County:
http://www.chathamncrod.org/Document...085&Close=True


Having the SECU say they will not lend against the properties with mineral rights excluded is an interesting development for resellers.

To see either of the deeds:

1. Right click one of the links above, and click "Copy Shortcut."
2. Click the link, which delivers you to the Chatham County Recorder of Deeds page, where you have to agree to disclaimer.
3. Paste the shortcut you copied into the address bar, and Go.

That should deliver you to the document.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2012, 01:45 PM
 
Location: Cary
226 posts, read 437,817 times
Reputation: 170
More than 2 Decades ago here in the Triangle when we were seeking a home, we ran across one in the Bayleaf or Sandy Chase area (can't recall exactly but those were the only 2) in which the predisclosures contained the " retention of mineral rights in perpetuity" by the existing owner or subdivision developer. We passed on those properties and moved somewhere else.

It's been around a while. I suspect homeowners in coal and oil states have experienced this frequently.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2012, 06:36 PM
 
3,155 posts, read 6,597,678 times
Reputation: 2043
Quote:
Originally Posted by 4alark View Post
in which the predisclosures contained the " retention of mineral rights in perpetuity" by the existing owner or subdivision developer.
From what I've read some of these homeowners were not disclosed this until they were at closing with their attorney. This seems like something that the seller should have to disclose in the disclosures prior to closing. But I'm not certain in NC this has to be legally disclosed. I imagine this whole business is going change some things (like disclosures) about real estate transactions in this state.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2012, 06:45 PM
 
3,271 posts, read 726,723 times
Reputation: 1440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherifftruman View Post
Seems kind of knee jerk for lenders not to lend against them, there's no additional risk involved and it's very common in other more mineral rich areas for this to be the case with almost all new subdivisions. What difference does it make to the lender if the homeowner on a .20 acre lot missed out on a few dozen bucks a year because some drilling rig is located maybe miles away?
Groundwater contamination has a tendency to kill resale values. There's a reason extraction from the Marcellus formation is done nowhere near Pittsburgh where the money and people in western PA are.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2012, 07:42 PM
 
Location: Morrisville, NC
3,229 posts, read 2,683,030 times
Reputation: 2502
Quote:
Originally Posted by box_of_zip_disks View Post
Groundwater contamination has a tendency to kill resale values. There's a reason extraction from the Marcellus formation is done nowhere near Pittsburgh where the money and people in western PA are.
My main point is if the well is a mile away what difference does it make if you have mineral rights or not? The water can become contaminated due to activities unrelated to the property in question. Not lending on a property without rights in no way limits risk. Only avoiding all properties in the area does that.

Also, contamination is not guaranteed and most subdivision houses in this area have no use for groundwater anyway.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-15-2012, 08:10 PM
 
Location: Charlotte, NC
1,887 posts, read 1,431,539 times
Reputation: 2540
If it was disclosed at closing that mineral rights would not be transferred to me at closing, I would walk away from the table. Knowing that at any time they could come and drill underneath my property without my permission, no matter how unlikely that may be, is not something I would ever concede. If I am going to own the land along with the property, I want the whole land, not just on the surface. Otherwise, I might as well not own the land at all.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $79,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, Cary
Similar Threads
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top