


Ask the community...
Update us when you figure this out! I've got a Nevada UCC-1 filing coming up next week and want to know if there are any current issues with their system.
I've been dealing with Nevada UCC filings for years and this sounds like their classic indexing problem. Here's what I'd recommend: 1) Try searching with variations of the debtor name - remove all punctuation, try different capitalization, and search for just "Mountain View Equipment" without "Solutions LLC". 2) Use the filing number search directly - that confirmation number should pull it up regardless of name issues. 3) If those don't work, call their UCC division at (775) 684-5708 and have them do a manual search. They can usually find filings that don't show up in the online system. I've had to do this dance with Nevada probably a dozen times and it's almost always a search/indexing issue rather than a lost filing. The fact that it shows as "Accepted" in your account is a good sign - the filing is there, just not searchable for some reason.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Update: Got connected with someone at Certana.ai after seeing it mentioned here. Their document checker tool is actually pretty slick - uploaded my draft UCC-1 and got instant feedback on the collateral description format. Turns out I was overthinking it, but good to have confirmation before filing. Thanks everyone for the guidance!
Just to clarify the UCC 1-308 confusion - that's actually about "reservation of rights" language used in contracts, not UCC-1 filings. For your equipment loan, you want to focus on UCC Article 9 requirements. A solid collateral description would be: "All machinery, equipment, and fixtures now owned or hereafter acquired by Debtor, located at [business address], including without limitation CNC machines, industrial printing equipment, tooling, and all attachments, accessories, and replacements thereof." Keep it broad enough to cover future equipment but specific enough to identify the collateral type. Most state filing offices are pretty consistent with what they accept for equipment descriptions.
Thanks for clearing up the UCC 1-308 confusion! That example collateral description looks really solid - exactly the kind of comprehensive language I was looking for. The "without limitation" clause is a nice touch to make sure we're covered for equipment variations. Really appreciate everyone's help sorting this out!
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.
That's essentially what Certana automates - the cross-checking between different documents to catch name inconsistencies before they become rejections.
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.
QuantumQuasar
I work in commercial lending and see this issue monthly. Best practice is always: 1) Get current organizational documents, 2) Verify exact legal name spelling/punctuation, 3) Use document verification tools when available, 4) Call the filing office if there's any doubt. Don't rely on old documents or assumptions.
0 coins
Zoe Stavros
•Do you have experience with the Certana thing that was mentioned earlier? Curious if it's actually worth using.
0 coins
QuantumQuasar
•I've heard good things about automated document checking tools for UCC work. Anything that reduces manual comparison errors is valuable in my book.
0 coins
Lucas Parker
For LLC name changes, I always recommend getting both the certificate of good standing AND the filed articles of amendment showing the name change. Sometimes there can be a lag between when the name change is effective versus when it shows up in the SOS database. Having both documents gives you the complete picture and proof of what the legal name should be on your filing date. Also, if you're in a rush, many states offer expedited certificate services for an extra fee - might be worth it to avoid another rejection cycle.
0 coins
QuantumQueen
•That's really helpful about getting both documents. I didn't realize there could be a lag between the effective date and when it shows up in the SOS system. The expedited certificate is a great idea too - probably worth the extra cost to avoid missing our closing deadline. Thanks for the practical advice!
0 coins