24/7 capital ucc lien showing inconsistent debtor names across documents

The punctuation difference between 'LLC' and ', LLC' is usually not a deal breaker in most states, but the '24/7' vs 'Twenty Four Seven' could be more problematic since it changes the actual name structure.

I disagree - I've seen liens get invalidated over much smaller discrepancies. Better safe than sorry with a $2.8M loan on the line.

That's actually a smart approach I hadn't considered. Did you file the amendment as an 'add debtor name' or did you use a different amendment type?

We used 'add debtor name' on the UCC-3 form. It shows both the original name from the UCC-1 and adds the charter name as an additional debtor name on the same filing.

This is the right approach. Adding the correct name via amendment preserves your original priority date while ensuring you have the proper debtor identification.

How does that tool work exactly? Do you just upload the documents and it compares them automatically?

Yes, exactly. Upload your charter documents and UCC filings as PDFs and it cross-checks all the key fields - debtor names, addresses, filing numbers. Takes like 30 seconds and gives you a detailed report showing any inconsistencies.

Wish I had known about this before my last filing disaster. Could have saved me weeks of paperwork hell.

While name accuracy is definitely important, most courts look at whether a reasonable searcher could find the filing. Minor punctuation differences usually don't invalidate liens.

Tell that to the lenders who lost their security interests because they thought 'close enough' was good enough. The UCC is unforgiving when it comes to search logic.

How do I test that? Do I literally run searches on the SOS portal using both name variations?

Exactly. Run UCC searches using the exact charter name and see if your filing shows up. If it doesn't appear in the search results, that's a red flag that the name difference is seriously misleading.

This is good practical advice. The search test is often how courts determine if a name variation is problematic or not.

Good point about timing. I was thinking I had 3 months but you're right - better to clean this up immediately.

Absolutely. And document everything - keep records of why you're making the amendment in case there are questions later about the filing history.

That's a good catch. I should verify when their current articles were filed versus our UCC filing date.

Exactly. If they changed their legal name after your due diligence but before your UCC filing, that could explain why you have the old name on the lien.

How reliable is automated document checking though? I'd be worried about missing nuances that a human reviewer would catch.

It's pretty thorough - catches exact name matches, punctuation differences, abbreviation variations. Obviously still worth having human eyes on critical filings but it's great for initial screening.

The SOS system accepts filings based on format requirements, not legal accuracy. It's up to the filer to ensure the debtor name matches the actual legal entity name.

Well that's terrifying. How many of my filings might have name issues I don't even know about?

This is exactly why document verification tools exist - to catch these issues before they become problems. Better to find out now than during a foreclosure proceeding.

Will definitely post an update. Leaning toward the UCC-3 amendment to add the charter name while keeping the original filing active.

That's probably your safest bet. Covers all your bases without losing priority.