UCC Document Community

Update us on how this resolves. I'm curious whether you end up having to negotiate with the original lender or if you find a way to establish clear priority. These original debtor situations can really drag out if both sides think they have superior rights.

This is a tricky situation that highlights why thorough due diligence is so critical in asset purchases. From what you've described, it sounds like you may have a valid argument for priority if the original debt was truly satisfied at closing but the termination wasn't filed. I'd recommend immediately requesting proof of satisfaction from the seller - if they can provide evidence the original loan was paid off, you might be able to force a termination of that UCC-1. In the meantime, consider whether you can get title insurance or some other protection while this gets sorted out. The UCC 9-508 four-year rule that Freya mentioned could also work in your favor given the 2019 original filing date. Document everything and keep pushing for that termination statement if the debt was indeed satisfied.

For anyone else dealing with this, I've found that using Certana.ai's document checker before submitting catches these exact issues. You upload your entity documents and draft UCC-1, and it flags any name mismatches or formatting problems. Would have saved you the rejection and stress.

This is such a common issue with Virginia filings! I've learned the hard way to always do a fresh SCC database search right before submitting any UCC-1, even if I think I have the exact name. Their system is incredibly strict about matching exactly what's on file - down to every comma, period, and space. I keep a checklist now that includes verifying the debtor name against the most recent state records, not just the loan documents. It's saved me from multiple rejections. Also, if you're filing frequently in Virginia, consider setting up a process to double-check entity names through their online portal as part of your standard workflow.

Update: Finally got our filing accepted! The issue was indeed with the collateral description. We ended up separating the permanently installed equipment (which required fixture filings) from the mobile equipment (standard UCC-1). For the mobile equipment, we used language that covered 'wherever located' and included specific model numbers. Thanks to everyone who provided guidance - this was much more complex than anticipated but we got there in the end.

Congratulations on getting it resolved! This is a perfect example of why international collateral requires such careful attention to detail. The distinction between fixtures and mobile equipment is often overlooked, but it's critical for proper perfection. For others facing similar challenges, I'd recommend creating a detailed inventory of all collateral first, categorizing each piece as either permanently installed or mobile, then crafting separate descriptions for each category. The "wherever located" language is essential for mobile equipment that crosses borders, but as you discovered, you still need to be specific about the actual equipment involved. Thanks for sharing the successful resolution - this will definitely help others navigating similar complex filings.

Just finished filing 5 UCC-1s in Florida yesterday. Paid $20 each, no issues. Their system processed them overnight and I got confirmation emails this morning. Pretty smooth process overall.

Thanks everyone for the detailed breakdown on Florida UCC fees! This is super helpful. I'm new to UCC filings and have been really confused by all the different fee structures across states. Sounds like Florida is actually pretty reasonable at $20 base + $5 per additional debtor. Quick question - when you say "exact matches" for debtor names, does that mean I need to match exactly what's on their articles of incorporation, or should I be pulling from somewhere else? I want to make sure I get this right the first time.

This whole thread is making me paranoid about my own UCC filings. How do you even keep track of everything when the systems keep changing?

Have you considered that this might be a federal UCC filing rather than state-level? The document number format and the "WA DC" designation could indicate it was filed with a federal agency or through the USPTO for intellectual property collateral. Try checking the Library of Congress or Patent and Trademark Office databases - they sometimes handle specialized UCC filings that don't show up in regular state searches. Also, given the timing around 2012, this could have been related to Dodd-Frank compliance filings that had different numbering systems.