Clear sky
Clear sky
42.8 °F
April 24, 2014
River Reporter Facebook pageTRR TwitterRSS Search Login

Wrongful takings, the sequel

The combination of these two factors could obviously have the effect of forcing numerous property owners who have no wish to lease into non-compliance with the terms of their mortgages. Properties in technical default on their current mortgages, and/or properties on which it is difficult or impossible to get a new mortgage, could become virtually unsaleable.

So, it looks like the action of the state, in collusion with drilling companies, could result in a significant number of properties becoming unmarketable and therefore worthless.

Sound familiar? It should. It’s called a “wrongful taking.” It certainly satisfies two major criteria: the property would be left with at most “a bare residue” of its worth, and the problem would not be self-created.

A third criterion—whether those who suffer are being unfairly singled out to pay for the supposed good of the whole—is perhaps not so black and white. It’s true that the Marcellus Shale covers a fairly large swath of New York State, so if a lot of properties are integrated it could be argued that too many people are affected in order to count as “singled out.” But let’s face it: if so many people were affected that they couldn’t be perceived as unfairly singled out, that would mean that a vast portion of New York real estate had become worthless—a pretty steep price to pay for any perceived public benefits of chasing after an obsolescent energy source like natural gas.

The bankers—and the investors to whom they wish to be able to sell mortgage-backed securities—have not created this situation because they are sentimentalists or tree huggers. They are businessmen, and many of them have apparently made the decision that land upon which natural gas leases have been signed is in such danger of becoming worthless that they don’t want to take a risk on it.

Think about it.

Communities in Jeapordy

We need to have a continuing study of the financial impacts gas drilling has on communities. I'm sure it will look like an exaggerated bell curve, peaking during drilling and initial production stages, then falling drastically a year or so after that period. This could help impress that the long-term effects of gas drilling on communities is disastrous.

On target.

Your editorial is on target, every point.

As I mentioned in another comment, my mortgagee, the "investor", must give consent to such gas extraction leasing, according to a representative of Coastal States.

God forbid that you are in New York State, which has a compulsory integration law, and that would negatively impact you in this way, if you are against such shale gas extraction.

None of these economic issues have been considered, in New York State.

It is frightening, and it should be thoroughly unacceptable.

unacceptable is hardly the word

This is indeed very frightening. Did the New York Times mention by name which lenders would not mortgage leased land? Does anyone have a link to the article. If a well goes in near my home, I will be foreclosed on for sure and my credit ruined.


I could not copy the link, perhaps the NYT's doesn't allow a computer to do that, but if you go to the Times website, there is a search box up left. Type in "drilling down", without the quotation marks. That is the title of the series of articles on gas extraction by Ian Urbina. When you click on search, it takes you to a page where the Urbina article on mortgages is the second listing. You can read the article from there.

When you wrote that you will be foreclosed on for sure, and your credit ruined, I suggest you not jump to that conclusion. We all have a lot to learn as to how this will play out, so don't take anything for granted.

The issues are real though, and they need to be explored. It took me over six weeks to get that phone message from the representative at my mortgage company. I think the companies themselves are scrambling on this issue, and they probably don't want to put anything in writing.