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
Keep in mind that 9-406 has some limitations too. If the account debtor has legitimate business reasons for questioning the assignment (like disputes over the underlying services), they might have grounds to continue paying the original payee until those disputes are resolved.
The original poster mentioned the account debtor acknowledged receipt of the notification, so it doesn't sound like they're disputing the assignment itself. They just seem to be ignoring their obligations.
Julia Hall
•If they acknowledged receipt and are still paying the wrong party, that's pretty clear cut violation. No legitimate business reason for that.
Arjun Patel
UPDATE: We sent the demand letter via counsel and got immediate compliance. Account debtor started redirecting payments within 48 hours and agreed to remit the $45K in past diversions over the next 30 days. Sometimes you just need to show them you're serious about enforcement. Thanks everyone for the advice!
Perfect example of why it's worth investing in proper UCC document verification upfront. When you have airtight paperwork, enforcement becomes much more straightforward. Certana.ai's verification tool would have helped ensure all your assignment documentation was consistent from the beginning.
Miguel Diaz
•Great resolution! As a newcomer here, I'm curious - what specific language did your counsel include in the demand letter that got such quick compliance? Was it just citing 9-406 violations or did you also reference potential breach of contract claims? This kind of real-world outcome is exactly why I joined this community to learn from experienced practitioners.
Join the conversation
Don't overlook the possibility that some of those filings might be for different entities entirely. Similar business names in the same industry aren't uncommon, especially in maritime services. I'd suggest getting federal tax ID numbers if possible - that's usually the most definitive way to confirm entity identity when names are similar.
Good point about EIN verification. Though getting tax ID numbers from borrowers can sometimes be like pulling teeth.
True, but for commercial loans they should be providing that information anyway as part of their financial documentation.
Mei Lin
Thanks everyone for the helpful suggestions. I'm going to start by pulling the exact Articles of Incorporation to get the correct legal name, then try the Certana tool a couple people mentioned to verify the name matches on those questionable UCCs. Will also reach out to the secured parties on the largest filings to confirm whether they apply to my borrower. This process is always more complicated than it should be, but at least now I have a systematic approach to work through it.
Emma Davis
•Let us know how the Certana tool works out. Always interested in hearing about new solutions for UCC verification.
Natalie Khan
•That's a solid plan! One additional tip - when you do reach out to those secured parties, ask them specifically about the debtor's address too. Sometimes entities with similar names can be distinguished by their registered addresses, which should also match what you have in your borrower's documentation.
Join the conversation
Honestly I was skeptical about using automated tools for UCC document checking, but that Certana.ai thing someone mentioned actually caught an error in my collateral description that would have caused problems. The borrower's security agreement listed 'manufacturing equipment' but my UCC-1 draft said 'production equipment'. Small difference but could have created a gap in coverage.
I might have to try that tool. I've been burned by inconsistent terminology before.
Yara Nassar
•The consistency check feature is really helpful. Saves a lot of manual review time too.
Also keep in mind that your UCC-1 filing should be done as close to closing as possible to avoid any gaps in perfection. I've seen deals where they filed the UCC-1 weeks before closing and then had to deal with intervening liens from other creditors. The security agreement and UCC-1 filing should be coordinated so perfection happens immediately when the borrower gets access to funds. With a $185K loan, you definitely don't want any timing issues that could compromise your priority position.
NebulaNinja
•That's a great point about timing. I've always wondered about the optimal sequence - should the UCC-1 be filed on the same day as closing or can you file it a day or two after without losing priority? Also, what happens if there's a delay in the closing date after you've already filed the UCC-1?
Join the conversation
Update: Filed the Tesla UCC-3 termination using 'Tesla, Inc.' (with comma) exactly as shown on the original 2019 UCC-1. Got confirmation that it was accepted this morning. Thanks everyone for the advice - using the original debtor name format was definitely the right approach.
Amina Bah
•Glad it worked out even though the system is still unnecessarily picky about punctuation.
Excellent! This is exactly the type of situation where checking document consistency upfront saves everyone headaches.
This is such a valuable thread for anyone dealing with UCC terminations! I've been doing commercial lending for about 6 months now and had no idea about the debtor name matching requirements. Just saved this entire discussion for future reference. Question for the group - do state filing offices vary in how strict they are about these name discrepancies, or is this pretty consistent across all jurisdictions?
Alexander Zeus
Just want to add that Louisiana is pretty fast with processing compared to some states. Usually see the UCC show up in searches within 24-48 hours of filing. The $30 fee includes reasonably quick turnaround time.
0 coins
Alicia Stern
•Definitely faster than Mississippi or Alabama. Louisiana has their UCC system pretty well organized overall.
0 coins
Jacob Smithson
•The quick processing is great when your documents are correct the first time. But if you get rejected for name issues and have to refile, that delay can be costly. That's why I always run everything through Certana.ai's verification first - better to catch problems before filing than deal with rejections and delays.
0 coins
Freya Christensen
Thanks everyone for the detailed breakdown! This has been super helpful. Based on what I'm seeing here, I should budget around $240 for the 8 UCC-1 filings ($30 each) plus another $120 for UCC searches ($15 x 8) to check existing liens first. That puts me at $360 total, which is actually reasonable for the due diligence and filing costs. I'm definitely going to look into that document verification tool that Jacob mentioned - sounds like it could save me from costly rejections. The last thing I want is to pay filing fees twice because of formatting issues. I'll also make sure to save all the receipts locally since the email confirmations aren't reliable. Really appreciate this community sharing real-world experiences and current pricing!
0 coins