


Ask the community...
OP - sounds like you have both personal property (equipment) and real property (facility) as collateral. The lender can pursue both tracks simultaneously. UCC sale for equipment will be fast, foreclosure for real estate will be slow. Different notice periods, different sale procedures, different redemption rights. Get legal help immediately.
But also make sure your documents are all properly aligned first. Legal help is expensive and you want to give them clean information to work with.
The key difference is speed and legal framework. UCC Article 9 governs your equipment (personal property) - this can move incredibly fast, sometimes with just 10 days notice depending on your security agreement terms. Regular foreclosure is for your facility (real property) under state mortgage law - this typically takes months with more procedural protections. Your lender likely has separate security interests in both and can pursue them simultaneously or sequentially. Given you have equity in the equipment ($180k value vs $145k debt), pay close attention to how they conduct any UCC sale - they must be commercially reasonable or you can challenge it. Document everything about their notice and sale process. Time is critical here since UCC sales move so fast.
For what it's worth, I've started building a small buffer into our filing budgets for potential rejections and refiling fees. It's annoying to have to do this, but better than explaining cost overruns to clients after the fact.
This whole Tennessee fee situation is such a headache! We're dealing with the same cost shock on our equipment financing deals. One thing that's helped us is batching filings when possible - at least we can spread the administrative time across multiple UCC-1s even if the per-filing cost is higher. Also learned the hard way to always run entity searches right before filing since Tennessee seems to be rejecting more filings for minor discrepancies. Has anyone tried reaching out to their state representatives about these increases? Wondering if there's any pushback from the business community on these fee hikes.
Great point about batching filings! I'm new to this community but have been dealing with similar UCC filing challenges in my state. The entity search tip is really valuable - I hadn't thought about doing that right before filing but it makes total sense given how strict they're getting with name matching. For the state representative outreach, you might want to coordinate with other lenders in Tennessee to present a unified business impact case. Sometimes these fee increases happen without much consideration for the cumulative effect on financing costs that ultimately get passed to borrowers.
Update us when you get it resolved! I'm dealing with a similar EIDL termination issue and want to see what approach works.
Same here. These EIDL terminations are turning into a nightmare for so many businesses.
This exact same thing happened to us! The original EIDL UCC-1 had our company name without the comma, but our current legal docs show it with the comma. What worked for us was pulling the actual original UCC-1 filing from the Secretary of State website and copying the debtor name character-for-character onto the UCC-3 termination form. Don't try to "fix" the name - just match exactly what's on the original filing. It's counterintuitive but that's how the system works. Also, if you're in a rush, definitely pay for expedited processing if your state offers it. We got ours processed same-day for an extra $35 fee. Good luck!
Update: Called Oklahoma SOS this morning and they confirmed the comma difference would cause rejection. Filing the amendment today and will do the continuation once it's processed. Thanks everyone for the guidance - this forum saved me from a major headache!
At least Oklahoma SOS was helpful when you called. Sometimes they act like they can't be bothered to explain their own rules.
Smart move calling them directly. Getting official confirmation prevents any surprises when you file.
Great to hear you got clarity from Oklahoma SOS! That's exactly why I always recommend calling the filing office when there's any doubt about their requirements. A quick phone call can save weeks of back-and-forth with rejections. Make sure to keep notes on what they told you in case you need to reference it later. Good luck with the amendment filing!
PixelWarrior
Make sure to check if any of the storage facilities have blanket liens or other creditor interests in stored goods. Some storage companies have policies about defaulted rent creating possessory liens that could complicate your security interest.
0 coins
QuantumLeap
•I hadn't thought about that angle. I'll need to review the storage lease terms and make sure the rent payments are current.
0 coins
Giovanni Rossi
•Also worth adding a provision to your loan agreement requiring the borrower to keep storage rent current and notify you of any payment issues.
0 coins
Alice Fleming
Based on your description, I'd strongly recommend filing UCC-3 amendments to add the storage facility addresses. While "all inventory now owned or hereafter acquired" is broad language, the fact that your original filing specified the primary business address creates ambiguity about whether the storage locations are covered. For $75k worth of collateral, the amendment filing costs are minimal compared to the risk of an unperfected security interest. Also consider adding language to your loan documents requiring borrower notification before moving inventory to new locations - this will help you stay ahead of these issues in the future.
0 coins
GalacticGladiator
•This is excellent comprehensive advice. I'm curious about the notification requirement you mentioned - would you structure that as a covenant in the loan agreement or as a condition precedent to future advances? Also, should we require advance written consent for new storage locations, or is notification sufficient? Given that this borrower already moved inventory without telling us, I want to make sure we have the right controls in place going forward.
0 coins