Ask the community...
- DO post questions about your issues.
- DO answer questions and support each other.
- DO post tips & tricks to help folks.
- DO NOT post call problems here - there is a support tab at the top for that :)
Join the conversation
Join the conversation
Just wanted to add something that saved us significant time and potential legal issues - before you even start drafting the subordination agreement, run a comprehensive UCC search in your state to see if there are any other liens or encumbrances on your equipment or inventory that you might not be aware of. We discovered an old mechanic's lien from equipment repairs that was still on file, which could have complicated our subordination if we hadn't caught it early. Also, consider whether your insurance policies need to be updated to reflect the new lien priority structure - some lenders require specific loss payee language that corresponds to their lien position. Finally, if you're dealing with specialized equipment, make sure both lenders understand exactly what they're getting security interests in. Our equipment lender initially balked when they realized some of our "manufacturing equipment" was actually leased rather than owned, which required additional documentation to clarify what collateral was actually available for the subordination.
This is such valuable advice - the comprehensive UCC search point is something that could really save people from nasty surprises down the road. I hadn't thought about the insurance policy implications either, but that makes total sense since lenders often have specific requirements about loss payee clauses that need to match their security interest priority. The point about leased versus owned equipment is particularly important for manufacturing companies where it's common to have a mix of owned and leased machinery. That distinction could definitely complicate the subordination if not addressed upfront. Thanks for sharing these insights - they really highlight how many moving parts are involved in what seems like it should be a straightforward priority adjustment!
Really appreciate all the detailed advice in this thread! I'm going through a similar subordination situation right now and this has been incredibly helpful. One thing I'd add based on my experience so far - make sure to get clarity from both lenders about their preferred subordination agreement format BEFORE you start drafting anything. Our equipment lender had very specific language requirements that weren't compatible with our inventory lender's standard template, which caused delays while the lawyers worked out acceptable compromise language. Also, if you're working with an SBA lender like some folks mentioned, they often have additional documentation requirements beyond the standard UCC-3 filing that other lenders might not be familiar with. Getting everyone on the same page about documentation requirements upfront can save weeks of back-and-forth revisions.
Zara Ahmed
•Great point about getting format preferences upfront! I'm just starting this process myself and wondering - when you say "specific language requirements," are we talking about legal terminology differences or more about the structure of how the subordination is described? Also, did you find that having the lawyers involved from the beginning actually sped things up compared to trying to work out the language differences yourselves first? I'm trying to decide whether to engage our attorney right away or attempt the initial draft ourselves.
Felicity Bud
•@c4105ca4b227 I'm dealing with this exact situation right now! When you mention "specific language requirements," I'm curious if that was more about legal terminology or structural differences in how the subordination was described? Our equipment lender keeps talking about "intercreditor provisions" while our existing lender just wants a simple priority adjustment - feels like they're speaking different languages. Also wondering if having lawyers draft everything from scratch ended up being more cost-effective than trying to merge incompatible templates. I'm torn between engaging our attorney upfront versus attempting the initial negotiations ourselves to save on legal fees.
Join the conversation
Aaron Lee
I work in commercial lending and see UCC termination delays constantly. Three months is unfortunately normal for some solar companies. Document every conversation with Sunrun (dates, names, what they promised) in case you need to escalate or file complaints with state regulators.
State regulators sometimes have more pull with solar companies than customer complaints. Worth filing a complaint if they keep stalling.
Mila Walker
•Documentation is key. That's another reason I liked using Certana.ai - it creates a paper trail of exactly what documents you have and any discrepancies between them.
Liam Duke
I'm dealing with a very similar situation right now! My solar loan was paid off in September and the UCC filing is still active too. What's worked for me is sending Sunrun a formal written request (email) asking for a timeline in writing for the UCC-3 termination filing. I also copied my mortgage broker on the email to show the business impact. They finally gave me a specific date (next Friday) instead of just saying "it's being processed." The key is making it clear that their delay has real financial consequences for you. If they miss their promised date, I'm planning to file the UCC-3 termination myself since I have all the documentation I need.
That's a really smart approach! Getting them to commit to a specific date in writing is way better than vague promises. I'm definitely going to try the formal email route and copy my mortgage broker too. It sounds like you've gotten further than I have just by documenting the business impact. Thanks for sharing what actually worked!
This is exactly the kind of actionable advice I needed! I love the idea of copying my mortgage broker on the email - that really drives home that this isn't just a minor paperwork issue, it's actively blocking my refinance. I'm going to draft that formal request tomorrow morning asking for a specific completion date. Did you include any particular language in your email that seemed to get their attention, or was it mainly just the formal tone and copying the broker that did the trick?
Join the conversation
Bottom line: 5 years from filing date, file continuation 6 months before expiration, extends for another 5 years. Set up a tracking system now so you don't miss any deadlines. The consequences of letting a UCC lapse can be severe if other creditors or bankruptcy happens.
Lydia Bailey
•Good luck! It's really not that complicated once you have a system in place.
Eli Butler
•This thread was super helpful. I have some 2020 filings too that I need to address soon.
Nia Davis
I've been dealing with similar UCC tracking challenges and wanted to share what worked for me. After missing a continuation deadline last year (luckily caught it just in time), I implemented a three-tier reminder system: 8 months out for initial planning, 6 months out for document preparation, and 4 months out for final review and filing. Also recommend keeping a master file with copies of all original UCC-1s, filing receipts, and any amendments - makes the continuation process much smoother when you have everything organized in one place.
That's a really smart three-tier system! I like the idea of having multiple checkpoints instead of just one reminder. The master file organization tip is especially helpful - I've been scrambling to find original documents when I need them. Do you keep physical copies or scan everything digitally? I'm trying to figure out the best way to organize all these UCC documents for easy access.
Join the conversation
Diego Fisher
Bottom line - don't stress too much about the 5-year timeline since you just filed last year. But definitely get a system in place to track it. Missing a continuation deadline is one of those mistakes that can have serious consequences for secured transactions.
Thanks everyone. Sounds like I have plenty of time but should start planning now. Really helpful to understand the timing and potential pitfalls.
Oscar O'Neil
•Good call asking about this early. Too many people only think about continuations when they're already in the deadline window.
One thing I'd add is that you should also verify that your original UCC-1 filing was actually accepted and properly indexed by the Texas SOS. I've seen cases where people think they have a valid filing but there was some technical issue that made it ineffective. You can search the Texas UCC database online to confirm your filing shows up correctly. Better to discover any problems now when you have time to fix them rather than when you're trying to file a continuation.
Ella Lewis
•That's really good advice about verifying the original filing. I hadn't thought about checking that it was properly indexed. Is there a specific search function on the Texas SOS website, or do you just search by debtor name?
Taylor To
I was skeptical when someone mentioned Certana.ai earlier, but I actually tried their UCC verification tool last month after my own filing got rejected for a debtor name mismatch. The automated comparison between documents is actually pretty thorough - it caught issues I would have missed manually reviewing everything. Worth using before you submit the new UCC-1 to avoid any technical rejections that would cause more delays.
0 coins
Ella Cofer
•Does it work with electronic filings or just paper documents?
0 coins
Taylor To
•Works with PDFs so it handles both. Most state systems give you PDF copies of electronic filings anyway.
0 coins
Kevin Bell
UPDATE: Got the UCC search results back and fortunately no other liens were filed during my lapse period. Filed the new UCC-1 this morning and it was accepted. Still angry about losing the 2020 priority date but at least we're perfected again. Thanks everyone for the advice - especially the suggestion to verify all documents before filing. Caught two small errors that could have caused a rejection.
0 coins
Kevin Bell
•One was a middle initial included in the new filing that wasn't in the original. The other was slightly different formatting in the collateral description. Small stuff but enough to potentially cause rejection.
0 coins
William Rivera
•Excellent news! Those kinds of small formatting differences are exactly what trip people up during urgent re-filings. The document verification tools are really becoming essential for avoiding costly delays. Hope you're also pursuing the malpractice claim against your previous counsel - that should cover any additional costs from the priority loss.
0 coins