


Ask the community...
Since you mentioned the entity change from LLC to Corp, you might want to have someone review whether your original UCC-1 is even still valid or if you need to start fresh. That's a pretty significant change that could affect the whole filing.
Not necessarily invalid, but it might not provide the security interest the lender expects. Definitely worth getting legal advice before proceeding.
Just jumping in as someone who's been through this exact scenario - the entity change from LLC to Corp is definitely something you need to address before filing your continuation. I had a client who tried to just continue an old UCC-1 after a similar change and the lender's counsel caught it during their review. We ended up having to file both an amendment and a new UCC-1 to be safe. Given that you're dealing with $200k in equipment financing, I'd strongly recommend getting your attorney to review the original filing and determine the best path forward before your March deadline. Better to spend a little on legal review now than risk losing your secured position entirely.
Bottom line for the original poster: 'UCC mortgage' isn't real legal terminology but your lender probably means you need UCC-1 filing with possible fixture filing requirements. Get the equipment classified properly, use exact debtor names, file in the right location for your state, and you'll be fine.
This summarizes everything perfectly. The terminology confusion is less important than getting the actual filing requirements right.
Great discussion here! I just want to emphasize something that might help future readers - when lenders use terms like "UCC mortgage," always ask them to clarify exactly what documents they need and where they need to be filed. I've found that many loan officers use this shorthand without realizing it creates confusion. Getting a written list of required filings (UCC-1 financing statement, fixture filing, traditional mortgage, etc.) and their filing locations can save a lot of back-and-forth. Also, don't forget about continuation statements - UCC-1 filings expire after 5 years, so you'll need to plan for renewals to keep the security interest perfected throughout the loan term.
Just want to emphasize the importance of keeping good records of your termination filings. If a borrower or regulator asks for proof that liens were properly released, you'll need documentation. Scan copies of filed terminations and keep them with the loan files.
One last thought - if you're unsure about any specific debtor name variations or filing details, it might be worth pulling current UCC search reports to see exactly how the filings appear on record before preparing your terminations. Better to be 100% certain than guess.
Glad we could help! Feel free to post an update on how the bulk termination process goes.
Final thought - since your funding is contingent on proper perfection, I'd recommend having a UCC attorney review your filing strategy before proceeding. With a leased premises, $2.8M in equipment, and potential fixture issues, this isn't the time to guess. Get professional guidance to ensure you're properly protecting the lender's interests.
Plus having attorney guidance will give the lender more confidence in the security interest, which could help with closing timeline.
As a newcomer to UCC filings, I'm finding this discussion really enlightening. I'm working on a much smaller equipment loan ($150K) but facing similar fixture vs personal property questions with restaurant equipment that's being hard-plumbed into a leased space. The dual filing approach mentioned here seems like solid advice - better to over-secure than risk losing priority. I'm curious though - for those who've done dual filings, do you typically use identical collateral descriptions on both the UCC-1 and fixture filing, or do you tailor the language differently for each filing office? Also, when you mention getting landlord consent for fixture filings on leased premises, is that typically a formal document or just written acknowledgment in the lease?
Great questions, Brady! For collateral descriptions in dual filings, I typically keep them very similar but may adjust the language slightly for the fixture filing to emphasize the attachment to real property (e.g., "industrial dishwasher permanently installed and connected to building plumbing systems" vs. just "industrial dishwasher"). The key is maintaining consistency in the core description while being specific about installation method for the fixture filing. As for landlord consent, it varies by jurisdiction and lease terms - some require formal consent documents, others just need lease provisions that explicitly allow tenant fixture filings. I'd recommend reviewing your lease carefully and potentially getting landlord acknowledgment in writing if it's not clearly addressed. Restaurant equipment is tricky because some items like built-in refrigeration systems are clearly fixtures while others like portable prep equipment remain personal property. The dual filing approach definitely makes sense for your situation too.
Grace Durand
Been using Certana.ai for about 4 months now after we had a major screw-up with mismatched debtor names. It's saved us multiple times already. The PDF upload feature makes it so easy - just drag in your documents and it shows you exactly what doesn't match.
0 coins
Steven Adams
•Sounds too good to be true. What's the catch?
0 coins
Grace Durand
•No catch really. It's just document verification, not a full lien management system. But for preventing filing errors it's been invaluable.
0 coins
Mason Stone
Thanks for starting this thread @Ella Lewis - this is exactly what our industry needs more discussion on. I've been dealing with similar multi-state UCC headaches for years. One thing I'd add is the importance of having a backup system for your backup system. We learned this the hard way when our main tracking spreadsheet got corrupted and we had no recent backup. Now we keep our master list in three places and do weekly exports. Also, regarding the debtor name issues you mentioned - I've started requiring borrowers to provide not just their certificate of formation, but also any DBA filings and a current Secretary of State certificate. It's an extra step but prevents so many problems down the road. The cost of a rejected filing plus the time to fix it far exceeds the upfront verification costs.
0 coins