UCC Document Community

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 :)

Riya Sharma

•

For future reference, might want to establish a standard process for verifying debtor names before any UCC filing. I always do: 1) State business entity search 2) Review Articles of Incorporation 3) Cross-check against loan documents 4) Call SOS if there's any uncertainty. Saves tons of problems down the road.

0 coins

Solid process. I do something similar and it's prevented most of my name-related rejections.

0 coins

That's essentially what Certana automates - the cross-checking between different documents to catch name inconsistencies before they become rejections.

0 coins

Madison Tipne

•

As someone who's been dealing with UCC filings for over a decade, I can't stress enough how important it is to get the exact legal entity name from the state's official records. Corporation service companies like CSC, CT Corporation, etc. are just registered agents - they handle mail and legal service but they're NOT the debtor entity. I always pull the exact name from the Secretary of State's business entity database and copy it character for character, including all punctuation. Don't trust business cards, letterhead, or even loan applications - go straight to the source. Also, many states now have online UCC search systems where you can test variations of the debtor name before filing to see what format they're expecting. It's saved me countless rejections over the years.

0 coins

Just to close the loop on your original question - UCC 9102 clearly states that for registered organizations, you use the name indicated on the public organic record. If the LLC changed its name after your loan docs but before filing, you absolutely need to use the current registered name, not the name from your loan agreement. The security agreement itself doesn't become invalid just because the entity name changed after signing.

0 coins

Sasha Reese

•

Smart move. And consider setting up a system to catch name changes earlier in the process. These issues are becoming more common as businesses rebrand more frequently.

0 coins

The document verification tools are really helpful for this. Upload your security agreement and UCC form together and it immediately flags any name inconsistencies.

0 coins

Zainab Omar

•

I've been through this exact scenario multiple times. The key insight from UCC 9102 is that it prioritizes the "public organic record" over any private agreements. Even if your security agreement has the old name, the UCC filing must use the current registered name as it appears in the Secretary of State records. One practical tip: I always recommend doing a UCC search under both the old and new names to see if there are any existing filings that might create priority issues. Also, consider whether you need to file a UCC-3 amendment if you have any existing filings under the old name. The $850K collateral value definitely makes this worth getting right the first time.

0 coins

This is incredibly helpful advice, especially the point about checking for existing filings under both names. I hadn't considered the priority implications if there are other lenders with filings under the old name. The UCC-3 amendment angle is also something I need to research - we do have some existing filings from previous advances that might need updating. Given the collateral value, I'm definitely going to take the comprehensive approach you're suggesting rather than just fixing the immediate filing issue.

0 coins

CosmicVoyager

•

Back to your original question - we implemented a hybrid approach. We use automated tools for document verification and name checking, but still have experienced staff review everything before submission. Gives us the efficiency boost without losing the human oversight for complex situations.

0 coins

Ravi Kapoor

•

Exactly. The goal isn't to eliminate human involvement entirely, just to catch the routine errors that slip through manual processes and free up staff time for the genuinely complex filings.

0 coins

Freya Nielsen

•

This approach worked for us too. The document checking tools handle the standard verification tasks, but we still have paralegal review for anything involving unusual collateral or complex corporate structures.

0 coins

Vanessa Chang

•

Really helpful thread! I'm in a similar situation at our regional bank - we're seeing UCC filing errors creep up as our commercial lending volume grows. The hybrid approach that @CosmicVoyager mentioned sounds promising. How do you handle the workflow between your automated checking tools and staff review? Are you using any specific criteria to flag which filings need extra human attention, or does everything still get reviewed manually after the automated checks?

0 coins

Bottom line - your GSA is the private contract creating the security interest, your UCC-1 is the public filing perfecting that interest. The GSA has all the detailed terms and conditions, the UCC-1 just gives public notice of the lien. Both are necessary but serve different purposes in the secured transaction process.

0 coins

This has been incredibly helpful everyone. I think I understand the distinction now and feel much better about handling these filings correctly.

0 coins

Wesley Hallow

•

Glad it helped! This stuff can be confusing the first time through but you've got it now.

0 coins

Ava Rodriguez

•

Just to add another practical tip - when you're reviewing your GSA before filing the UCC-1, pay special attention to any specific serial numbers or model numbers listed for the equipment. If your GSA identifies specific machinery by serial number, you might want to include those details in your UCC-1 collateral description too, especially for high-value equipment. It makes the security interest more specific and can help avoid disputes later about what exactly is covered. For manufacturing equipment like yours, having those serial numbers in both documents creates a clear paper trail.

0 coins

Mei Lin

•

Keep us posted on what you find out! This is exactly the kind of situation that makes me paranoid about every UCC filing I do.

0 coins

NebulaNova

•

Will do. I'm going to check for amendments first, then run the documents through a verification tool, then call the state office if needed. Hopefully one of those steps will solve it.

0 coins

Carmen Lopez

•

Good plan. The document verification should give you a clear picture of any mismatches before you spend time on the phone with the state.

0 coins

Lucas Turner

•

I've dealt with this exact issue before with a 2021 filing that got stuck in limbo. One thing that helped me was requesting a certified copy of the original UCC-1 directly from the Secretary of State's office - sometimes what you think was filed isn't exactly what's on their system. Also, if your lender is giving you pushback about whose responsibility it is, remind them that under UCC Article 9, secured parties have an obligation to file terminations when the debt is satisfied. They can't just dump it on you if their paperwork was defective. The fact that you got a confirmation number but the filing is still active suggests either a name mismatch or the termination hit some validation error in their system.

0 coins

Prev1...188189190191192...684Next