


Ask the community...
Last suggestion - if you're doing multiple UCC filings regularly, consider setting up an account with their portal. Makes repeat filings much faster since it saves your secured party info.
No fee for the account setup, you just pay per filing. But it's convenient if you file regularly.
As someone who's been through similar naming issues with LLC filings, I'd strongly recommend doing a quick entity verification search on the Indiana SOS business database before filing. For your J&M situation, the legal entity name "J&M Construction Services, LLC" is almost certainly what you want to use - the DBA name doesn't matter for UCC purposes. Also, since this is a $180K equipment loan, consider having your collateral description reviewed by your legal team if possible. Something like "All equipment, machinery, tools, and fixtures used in debtor's construction business operations" should be comprehensive enough without being too broad. Indiana's portal is generally reliable, but definitely save/print your confirmation immediately after submission.
Great comprehensive advice! The entity verification search is definitely the safest approach. One thing I'd add - when you do find the exact legal name in the Indiana database, take a screenshot or print it out for your records. That way if there's ever a question about the name you used, you have documentation showing exactly what was in the state system at the time of filing. Really helpful for audit trails, especially on larger loans like this one.
The collateral description is just as important as the debtor name. For equipment financing, be specific but not so narrow that you miss covered assets. Generic descriptions like 'all equipment' work better than trying to list every serial number.
That should work, but you might want to add 'and all proceeds thereof' to cover any insurance payouts or sale proceeds.
I always include proceeds language. Covers you if the equipment gets sold or damaged.
Been doing UCC filings for 15 years and the biggest mistake I see is people trying to save money by filing everything themselves without proper verification. A $50 filing fee turns into $500 in legal fees when you mess up the perfection and have to sort out priority disputes later.
As someone new to UCC filings, this whole thread has been incredibly helpful. It sounds like the key is getting accurate debtor information, using current forms, and having some kind of verification process. For an $850K deal, spending a little extra on tools or professional review seems like smart insurance. Thanks everyone for sharing your experiences!
Keep in mind that 9-406 has some limitations too. If the account debtor has legitimate business reasons for questioning the assignment (like disputes over the underlying services), they might have grounds to continue paying the original payee until those disputes are resolved.
The original poster mentioned the account debtor acknowledged receipt of the notification, so it doesn't sound like they're disputing the assignment itself. They just seem to be ignoring their obligations.
If they acknowledged receipt and are still paying the wrong party, that's pretty clear cut violation. No legitimate business reason for that.
UPDATE: We sent the demand letter via counsel and got immediate compliance. Account debtor started redirecting payments within 48 hours and agreed to remit the $45K in past diversions over the next 30 days. Sometimes you just need to show them you're serious about enforcement. Thanks everyone for the advice!
Perfect example of why it's worth investing in proper UCC document verification upfront. When you have airtight paperwork, enforcement becomes much more straightforward. Certana.ai's verification tool would have helped ensure all your assignment documentation was consistent from the beginning.
Great resolution! As a newcomer here, I'm curious - what specific language did your counsel include in the demand letter that got such quick compliance? Was it just citing 9-406 violations or did you also reference potential breach of contract claims? This kind of real-world outcome is exactly why I joined this community to learn from experienced practitioners.
Don't overlook the possibility that some of those filings might be for different entities entirely. Similar business names in the same industry aren't uncommon, especially in maritime services. I'd suggest getting federal tax ID numbers if possible - that's usually the most definitive way to confirm entity identity when names are similar.
Thanks everyone for the helpful suggestions. I'm going to start by pulling the exact Articles of Incorporation to get the correct legal name, then try the Certana tool a couple people mentioned to verify the name matches on those questionable UCCs. Will also reach out to the secured parties on the largest filings to confirm whether they apply to my borrower. This process is always more complicated than it should be, but at least now I have a systematic approach to work through it.
Let us know how the Certana tool works out. Always interested in hearing about new solutions for UCC verification.
That's a solid plan! One additional tip - when you do reach out to those secured parties, ask them specifically about the debtor's address too. Sometimes entities with similar names can be distinguished by their registered addresses, which should also match what you have in your borrower's documentation.
Evan Kalinowski
Hope this helps with your audit! UCC searches can be stressful when you're under time pressure but California's system is one of the better ones. Just stay organized with your debtor name list and you should be fine. Let us know how it turns out!
0 coins
Emily Sanjay
•Thanks everyone for the great advice! I feel much more confident about tackling this now. I'll update the thread once I get through the searches.
0 coins
Victoria Charity
•Good luck! These big UCC audits are always nerve-wracking but it sounds like you're approaching it the right way.
0 coins
Malik Thomas
One more tip for your California UCC searches - if you're dealing with any corporate debtors that might have undergone mergers or acquisitions during that 2015-2023 timeframe, make sure to search under both the original entity name and any successor entities. California doesn't automatically transfer UCC filings when companies merge, so you could have active filings under old company names that are still legally valid. I've seen deals get held up because someone missed a filing under a predecessor company name that was still perfecting collateral.
0 coins
Ravi Patel
•That's an excellent point about successor entities! I hadn't thought about mergers and acquisitions during that timeframe. Do you know if California has any specific procedures for tracking corporate name changes, or would I need to do separate searches for each variation? This is adding another layer of complexity but definitely better to catch it now than during closing.
0 coins