Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Has anyone come across a good quitclaim deed for transferring ownership of mining claims?  This would be for California.

Tons of forms on internet but was wondering if anyone found a specific one that worked great.

Thanks.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, LipCa said:

Has anyone come across a good quitclaim deed for transferring ownership of mining claims?  This would be for California.

Tons of forms on internet but was wondering if anyone found a specific one that worked great.

Thanks.

 

I don't know about California, but I have been using this one for years with no problem.

QUITCLAIM DEED MINING CLAIM.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Different States have different requirements. Transfers of mining claims are governed by State law. What works in one state is unlikely to be effective in another.

You will need to look up the laws specific to quit claiming a mining claim in your state. Several states, including Arizona, require added verbiage to avoid additional taxes and to make sure it is recorded as the proper document type.

States also control what legal description is required to describe the property bounds and documents. Generally what works in one State is unlikely to be proper for another State.

It appears that in California you also need to record a Preliminary Change of Ownership Report and provide a Assessor Parcel Number (APN).

You need to be careful to investigate the ownership and liabilities of the claim before you agree to a quitclaim. The quitclaim deed contains no warranties of title or ownership. The quitclaim only transfers to the grantee (recipient of the deed) whatever title or ownership, if any, that the grantor has at the time the deed is delivered to the grantee. If the grantor owns nothing, the grantee receives nothing. If the grantor has encumbered the claim with debt or other liabilities like mining waste cleanup or unfinished restoration work you could be buying someone else's problems.

Pig in a poke. Cat in a bag. Mining claim quitclaim.  ...You only have yourself to blame legally if you don't look into the poke, bag or actual ownership and liabilities of a mining claim.

 

  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my case, a husband and wife were on an association claim with me. The husband died and the wife wants out.  She wants to give their interest to two of my sons.  I guess we could do a Grant Deed but I thought you used Quitclaim deeds on claims?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep lipca, quitclaim is the right process. A quitclaim in California is a form of grant deed.

Here is a web site with a general form for California. You would need to modify the property description area to include the stuff for a mining claim. I'm not endorsing this form or the website and I'm pretty sure the form as is isn't adequate but it might be a place to start.

As far as describing a mining claim I suggest all the following may help to define just what it is you are transferring ownership on.

  1. The name of the claim
  2. The BLM serial number (CAMC# in your case?)
  3. The County book and page of the original Location Notice recording
  4. A physical location description indicating the Meridian, Township, Range, Section, Quarter Section and County
  5. The name(s) and address of the original owner and the new owner(s)

Beware. At all times you must have one association member for every 20 acres. When an association member passes the estate of the former member represents one member. If the wife is already a member of the association she can not also be the owner of the husbands portion as well as her own. Have the estate quitclaim the husbands portion of the claim and have the wife quitclaim her portion. Otherwise you may be required to reduce the claim by 20 acres.

Don't describe the interest being quitclaimed as 20 acres or any other physical portion of the claim. Just quitclaim the members interest in the claim to someone who doesn't already have an interest that would leave you with too few members to support the size of the claim.

There may be more needed. This is not legal advice just an informed opinion.

Don't forget to file a Transfer of Interest in Mining Claim with the BLM when you complete and record the quitclaims. Include a photocopy of the notarized quitclaim with the transfer notice and send the $15 filing fee along to the State BLM office..

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't believe there is an estate for the deceased husband.  I think the surviving spouse takes ownership of everything.  At least that is what I've seen happen. ??  I think there is a "term" for that but I don't know what it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think "estate" is a legal term/concept lipca. Here's some information from California.

Quote

Losing a loved one is a sad and difficult time for family, relatives, and friends. In addition, those left behind must often figure out how to transfer or inherit property from the person who has died. The property that a person leaves behind when they die is called the “decedent’s estate.” The “decedent” is the person who died. Their “estate” is the property they owned when they died.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On August 1, 2019 at 8:46 AM, LipCa said:

In my case, a husband and wife were on an association claim with me. The husband died and the wife wants out.  She wants to give their interest to two of my sons.  

Hi LipCa,

Clay Diggins has provided some good information and linked to some specific helpful sites. I will add a bit more if I may.

I am sure you know that Calif is a community property state. But married couples can hold title as separate entities. It is important to know how the husband (deceased) and his wife (widow) held their interest(s) on the claim with you. Jointly, sole and separate, or tenants in common? 

If they held a partial (one-half) interest in the claim title jointly as husband and wife, and you held the other half interest, then the transfer of their joint right, title and interest in said mining claim via quit claim deed would be correct for unpatented title. I do not have a clue what BLM requires, but as far as state law being dispository you should not have any issues with the Siskiyou County Recorder. I suggest concurrent recording of the Certificate of Death first just to establish sequential document numbers to keep the official record orderly regarding this particular issue. 

I will say that if your claim title is held in a different manner, then the above suggestion may not work. Title issues can be a can of worms, but not usually. Each party is willing, no title insurance is involved, and the BLM rules are public. I hope this might help you some. Best wishes.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On August 1, 2019 at 5:29 PM, LipCa said:

I think the surviving spouse takes ownership of everything.  At least that is what I've seen happen. ??  I think there is a "term" for that but I don't know what it is.

LipCa,

I just re-read your post and noticed the question you asked in the above quote. So I thought the following may assist you in getting your claim in order.

The "term" you are looking for I believe is joint tenancy. The terminology on the existing deed should read something very close to " 'John and Jane Doe', husband and wife as joint tenants." You are correct in your understanding that the surviving spouse in a joint tenancy takes sole ownership conveyed by operation of law. If that is the case, then the matter is simple.

In your circumstance, IF the surviving spouse held title as a joint tenant with her now deceased husband, then she has a right to convey  (or quit) her now sole and separate right, title and interest as " 'Jane Doe' a widow," to your sons. You must indicate on the deed how your sons will hold title in order for it to conform with state requirements so it can be recorded.

I hope this might clarify a couple of points that were not specifically addressed in my previous post. It sounds like you are right on track. My apologies for any redundant or otherwise unnecessary info I may have posted here. Once again, best wishes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flowdog, that was not the term I had heard.  But thanks to everyone for the information.

I made a call to BLM in Sacramento and they gave me this procedure....  First off, this is an association claim which requires 4 individuals.

They said to remove the person that died with a Death Certificate and a letter from the surviving spouse stating that she is the sole heir to his estate. Then quitclaim her interest to both of my sons.

They said they do not go by "percentage" of interest but by the number of individuals on the claim. In the end, I have 4 names on the claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Similar Content

    • By Gold Hound
      Hi Guys
      I've started this post to inform members and non member detectorists that the NQMA  (North Queensland Miners Association) is lobbying the Queensland Mines department to change access laws to EPM's (exploration tenements)
      The proposed change would ban detecting and prospecting on exploration tenements without the consent of the tenement holder.
      This would effectively ban metal detecting in any gold field as they are mostly covered by exploration tenements. Whats worse is that more than half of the members of the NQMA are detectorists or hobby prospectors. And they are using the money from their yearly fee's to lobby for this change.
      This change is the brain child of James Said the current president of the organization.
      I urge members and non members to contact the NQMA and voice your concern about the changes they are lobbying for.
      To contact the NQMA please email info@nqma.com.au, please reference the best contact below in your email.
      President – James Said
      Vice President – Graham Byrne
      Secretary – Lyn Byrne
      Treasurer – Michele Mobbs
      Native Title Officer – Paul Crossland
      Publicity Officer – James Said
      Feel free to spread the word 
      Regards
      Dale
    • By Sourdough Scott
      This is a great response.  Had to share. 
      http://www.reptilesmagazine.com/Owners-Response-to-Govt-Request-to-Access-Property-to-Count-Yellow-Legged-Frogs-is-Priceless-trending/
    • By WesD
      I was researching online about filing a gulch claim, and found  this post, which I copied below. Can someone tell me if the part about 2 locators fitting in a 60 acre square is correct, or do they mean 80 acres? 
      "Second only to acreage the gulch claim is a real problem. Sure, it's legal to file a gulch, but BLM discourages it and for good reason. If your claim is in an area which has been surveyed you are supposed to file in accordance with the Public Land Survey System. You can file a gulch if your minerals are in a very narrow area, such as a river. Although we've seen a lot of gulch filings we haven't seen many which are valid. While people know they can file a gulch claim by using metes and bounds such as "Beginning at the confluence of Slug Gulch an Starvation Creek and extending up Starvation Creek to the North with 50 yards on each side of the center line..." The gulch claim must still be constrained to 20 acres for one locator, 40 for two and so on. However, most people don't realize the gulch claim must fit into a 40 acre square with one locator, a 60 acre square for two locators and so on. Most people run their gulch claims across multiple 40 acre squares trying to take up as much creek as they can. It is not a valid claim. You should consult the BLM manual prior to filing a gulch claim. It's a risky type of claim but if you insist on doing it do it right and read up on it."
    • By jasong
      Please, no rants, opinion, or anything off the topic. Mining only. Claims should be substantiated and supported with valid sources and evidence. Anecdotal evidence is not useful here. Please be able to cite which particular law or regulation an abuse or overstep is occuring upon. I'm especially interested if such a regulation is in violation of the General Mining Act of 1872.
       
      Federal only (BLM, EPA, DEQ, USFS, etc), unless it's a state issue where they are clearly violating federal law.
       
      I've read about people's complaints online for years. So let's imagine that over the next few days we have someone's ear who is in a position and has the power to really change things for a moment and is interested in truly representing the people. What would the mining community take that opportunity to say to them? 
    • By Clay Diggins
      We've been experimenting with ways to share complex information more easily on Land Matters. Here's my latest efforts at making things clearer with a chart. It's a common question so I thought this might be a good test.
       
      There are about 380,000 mining claims in the western mining states.

      Out of those 380,000 mining claim there are about 19,236 that are declared as owned by small miners not subject to maintenance fees.

      A little more than 5% of all claims are small miners.

      Here's a chart that breaks down where those 19,236 small miners are by State and claim type.
       


      Let me know if this kind of chart works for you. If it does I'll make more.
    • By Clay Diggins
      Congratulations to our fellow miners in Oregon!

      The patent for the Garden Spot placer mining claim was finally issued.

      Some hard working miners now have their own 50 acres of private land in the Siskyou National Forest and BLM managed lands.

      The final cert was awarded in 1990 so it only took the BLM 25 years to get that stamp to the ink pad, stamp and sign the Patent and mail it out. Our fine employees at work!

      ORMC86146 is now closed and private patented mineral property. The beauty is the proud "new" owners live on Galice Creek.

      Barry
×
×
  • Create New...