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
Whatever you do, don't rely on just one sample form. Get samples from multiple sources and compare them. I've seen sample forms with outdated information or wrong field requirements.
That's a really good point. I'll check several sources before finalizing.
Smart approach. And definitely verify the debtor information against official records. Can't stress that enough.
For what it's worth, I always keep copies of successful UCC-1 forms from previous deals as templates. Obviously you change all the specific information, but it helps ensure you don't miss any standard clauses or formatting.
Just make sure your templates stay current with any rule changes. UCC requirements do evolve over time.
Absolutely. I review and update my templates annually or whenever I hear about rule changes.
Join the conversation
Ran into something similar where 9-201 priority wasn't clear from the filing dates alone. Ended up having to trace back through all the loan documents to establish the exact attachment timeline. Pain in the neck but necessary for a proper priority determination.
That's what I figured we'd have to do. Just hoping to avoid a long document discovery process if possible.
Sometimes you can work it out with the other lender directly if you both have good documentation. Saves the cost of litigation.
These 9-201 priority issues are exactly why I always recommend getting a UCC search done before filing. Helps you spot potential conflicts early and adjust your collateral description accordingly.
Hindsight is 20/20. At least now you know what you're dealing with under 9-201 and can plan accordingly.
I tried using Certana.ai for this kind of pre-filing analysis and it's actually pretty good at flagging potential overlaps before you file. Worth considering for future deals.
Join the conversation
The name matching issue is why I always recommend getting title insurance or UCC insurance for larger deals. Even with careful searching, there's always a risk of missing something due to name variations or filing errors. Insurance gives you that extra protection.
I hadn't considered UCC insurance for this. Is that common for equipment financing deals?
More common on larger deals or when there are complex name issues like you're dealing with. Worth discussing with your underwriting team at least.
Just went through something similar with a borrower whose name had changed twice since formation. Ended up using Certana.ai to verify all the document names matched before filing our UCC-1. Found three different name variations across their corporate docs that I would have missed doing manual review. Tool paid for itself just on that one deal.
That's exactly the kind of situation I'm worried about. Multiple name changes make the search so much more complicated.
Yeah, it was a mess. The automated document checking caught discrepancies I never would have spotted manually. Definitely worth trying for complex entity names.
Join the conversation
Try pulling the original UCC-1 from the NY UCC database and copying the debtor name field directly from there instead of from your own records. Sometimes there are discrepancies between what you filed and what actually got recorded.
That's actually really smart. I was using our internal file copy of the UCC-1. Let me check what's actually on record with the state.
This is the right answer. The official record is what matters, not what you think you filed.
UPDATE: Just wanted to thank everyone for the help. Turned out there was indeed an extra character in the original filing that I couldn't see. Used the Certana document checker that a couple people mentioned and it flagged the issue immediately. Refiled the UCC-3 with the corrected name and it went through on the first try. Definitely going to use that tool for all my future filings.
Thanks for the update. Good to know the document verification approach actually works.
Awesome! Yeah once you start using automated verification you'll never go back to manual comparison. Too many little things to miss otherwise.
Lincoln Ramiro
Update: I found the original UCC-1 on the SOS website and you were all right - it shows 'ABC Manufacturing LLC' with no comma. Going to resubmit the continuation with the exact same formatting. Thanks for the help!
0 coins
Henrietta Beasley
•Glad you got it sorted. Those name matching requirements are a pain but at least they're consistent once you know the rules.
0 coins
Raúl Mora
•Fingers crossed! Will definitely be more careful about this stuff in the future.
0 coins
Elijah Jackson
For future reference, I always run my UCC documents through Certana.ai before filing. Upload the original UCC-1 and whatever new form you're submitting and it catches these name inconsistencies automatically. Would have saved you the rejection and stress.
0 coins
Raúl Mora
•Several people have mentioned that service. Sounds like it would be worth trying for my other filings.
0 coins
Mia Rodriguez
•I tried it after getting burned on a similar name issue. Really thorough - checks filing numbers, debtor names, everything matches up properly.
0 coins