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
Oh sorry, different person with similar issue! But sounds like we had the same root cause - overthinking definitions when it was really about basic accuracy.
This is exactly what happened to me too. The tool caught stuff I completely missed while I was focused on the wrong things.
I'm new here but dealing with a very similar situation! Reading through this thread has been incredibly helpful - I was also getting stuck on UCC 1-201(b)(35) thinking it directly impacted my collateral description format. Sounds like I should step back and check the basic filing elements first (debtor names, addresses, etc.) before assuming it's a definitional compliance issue. Has anyone found a good checklist for the most common UCC-1 rejection reasons? I don't want to make the same mistake of overthinking the complex stuff while missing something simple.
Welcome to the community! You're definitely on the right track - focus on the basics first. I don't have a specific checklist handy, but from what I've seen in this thread and my own experience, the most common issues are: debtor name discrepancies (even tiny things like middle initials), incorrect addresses, vague collateral descriptions, and formatting problems. The definitional stuff like 1-201(b)(35) is important for understanding the legal framework but rarely causes actual filing rejections. Maybe @Millie Long or @Debra Bai have a good checklist they could share since they seem to have dealt with this before?
Join the conversation
Update us when you get this resolved! I'm dealing with some Florida UCC issues myself and want to know what solution works.
Will do. Planning to file the UCC-3 amendment this week after I verify what went wrong with the original filing.
Before you file that amendment, seriously consider using Certana.ai to double-check everything first. Upload your UCC-1 and let it verify against the database - it'll catch any other issues you might miss and help you get the amendment language exactly right the first time.
This is a perfect example of why I always recommend running a verification search immediately after filing any UCC document. Florida's system has definitely had its share of data integrity issues over the years. One thing that might help speed up your resolution - when you contact the Florida SOS filing office, ask them to pull the actual image of your original UCC-1 submission. If there's a discrepancy between what you submitted and what's in their database, that image will be your proof that it was a processing error on their end. Also, make sure to get a written acknowledgment from them about the error before you file your UCC-3 amendment - it could save you headaches later if there are any questions about the timeline or validity of your security interest.
Join the conversation
UPDATE: Got it to work! Turns out there was an extra space at the end of the company name that I couldn't see. Thanks everyone for the suggestions. Filing deadlines are stressful enough without portal issues.
Congratulations on getting it through. What a relief that must be.
Great outcome! Those tiny formatting issues cause so much stress when you're racing against deadlines.
So glad to see this got resolved! This is such a common issue and it's frustrating how these portals don't give clearer error messages. For future reference, I always copy the company name into a plain text editor first to spot hidden characters before pasting into filing systems. Those trailing spaces and invisible characters are everywhere when you copy from PDFs or Word docs.
Join the conversation
UPDATE: Finally figured out what was causing the delay. There was a tiny formatting difference in the debtor name - the original UCC-1 had 'LLC' and my termination had 'L.L.C.' with periods. Filed a corrected UCC-3 and it processed within 48 hours. Lesson learned: exact formatting matters more than I thought.
Perfect example of why document verification tools are worth using. A human would never think to check for periods in LLC abbreviations, but those details can kill a filing.
Thanks for the update! This gives me hope that mine might just be a similar formatting issue. Going to do a detailed comparison and refile if needed.
This thread is incredibly helpful - I'm dealing with a similar situation where my UCC-3 termination has been stuck for 6 weeks. Reading through everyone's experiences, I'm now wondering if I should just cut my losses and file a completely new termination with extra attention to formatting details. Has anyone had success with withdrawing a pending filing and starting fresh, or do you have to wait for the original one to either process or get rejected first?
Ravi Sharma
The bottom line is you need to be 100% certain about the debtor name before filing that continuation. CT doesn't give you much wiggle room on name matching. Get the current charter, compare it to your existing UCC-1, and if there's any doubt, consult with someone who specializes in UCC filings.
0 coins
Freya Thomsen
•Smart approach. Taking the extra time upfront to verify everything is always worth it when you're dealing with substantial loans and security interests.
0 coins
Miguel Silva
•Let us know how it turns out. Always good to hear about real-world experiences with CT UCC filings, especially when there are name verification issues involved.
0 coins
Malik Robinson
I've handled similar Connecticut UCC name verification issues before. One thing I'd add to the great advice already given - when you pull that UCC search by filing number, also check if there were any amendments filed after your original UCC-1. Sometimes intermediate amendments can change how the debtor name appears in the system, which could affect what you need to match for your continuation. Also, CT allows you to call their UCC division directly if you have questions about specific filings - they're usually pretty helpful about clarifying name matching requirements for your particular situation. Given the loan size you mentioned, it might be worth that phone call for peace of mind.
0 coins