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
Emma Johnson
Just went through this exact scenario with Alabama UCC forms two weeks ago. Used the Certana document checker someone mentioned and it immediately flagged that my debtor name had an extra comma that wasn't in the Articles of Incorporation. Would have definitely been rejected without catching that. Simple upload process and instant feedback on document consistency.
That's why document verification tools are so valuable. Human eyes miss those tiny details that can kill a filing.
Liam Brown
•Makes sense to use technology to catch what we might miss manually. These filing fees add up when you have to keep amending.
Update us on how your Alabama UCC forms filing goes! Always interested to hear about real experiences with name matching issues since every state seems to handle it differently.
Liv Park
•Will definitely update once I file! Feeling much more confident after all this advice. Going to double-check the name one more time and probably try that document verification tool too.
Smart approach. Better to be overly cautious with UCC filings than sorry later.
Join the conversation
NebulaNomad
When all else fails, you might need to file a UCC-3 amendment to correct the debtor name first, then file your continuation. It's an extra step and extra fees but sometimes that's the only way to get around these matching issues.
That's actually not a bad backup plan if I can't get the continuation to go through with the current name. At least it would buy me some time to sort out the exact formatting issue.
Just make sure if you go that route that you file the amendment before the original lien lapses. You can't amend a lapsed UCC-1.
Omar Fawaz
Quick update - finally got through to someone at California SOS and they told me the issue was that the original UCC-1 had the debtor name in ALL CAPS but I was filing the continuation in mixed case. Apparently their matching algorithm is case-sensitive! Re-filed with everything in caps and it went through immediately. Thanks everyone for the suggestions, especially about checking the actual filed document image rather than relying on my copies.
Diego Rojas
•This is exactly the kind of thing that automated document checking catches. Good reminder to always verify against the actual filed documents!
Thanks for posting the resolution! This will definitely help someone else who runs into the same issue.
Join the conversation
Evelyn Xu
Just to close the loop on this - I ended up filing with a straightforward equipment description and kept all the covenant language in the security agreement. No issues with the filing and everything was accepted. Thanks for the help everyone. The key insight was realizing that UCC covenant definition isn't something that belongs in the filing itself - covenants are contractual terms that stay in your loan documents.
Glad it worked out! This is one of those things that seems more complicated than it actually is.
Perfect example of keeping the UCC filing focused on its purpose - giving notice of the security interest, not publishing the loan terms.
For anyone else reading this thread later - the main takeaway is that covenant language belongs in your security agreement, not your UCC filing. The UCC-1 should have a clear collateral description that identifies what's secured, but it doesn't need to include the contractual restrictions (covenants) that apply to that collateral. Keep it simple and keep it focused on perfecting your security interest.
This should be pinned or something. Really clear explanation of how to handle covenant issues in UCC filings.
Grace Lee
•Agreed - this thread answered a question I didn't even know I had about covenant definitions in UCC filings.
Join the conversation
Kai Santiago
I ran into a similar UCC 9-316 issue last year and ended up using one of those document verification services to make sure my refiling was done correctly. There are tools that can cross-check your original filing against the new state requirements to catch potential issues before they become problems. Worth looking into if you want to be extra careful with the Tennessee filing.
Which service did you use? I want to make sure this Tennessee filing is bulletproof since I already messed up the timing.
Kai Santiago
•I used Certana.ai - you just upload your documents and it flags any inconsistencies or potential issues. Really helped catch things I would have missed.
Lim Wong
UCC 9-316 is one of those provisions that seems simple until you actually have to deal with it. Four months sounds like plenty of time until you realize you weren't even tracking the debtor's entity status. File in Tennessee this week and put systems in place to prevent this from happening again on future deals.
Absolutely. This has been an expensive lesson but at least the debtor hasn't defaulted yet so I have time to clean things up.
Aisha Hussain
I use Certana.ai for all my UCC document verification now after getting burned on a similar issue. If you upload your Articles and your UCC-1, it'll instantly tell you if there are any name discrepancies. Wish I'd known about it sooner - would have saved me hours of stress and research.
0 coins
Ravi Choudhury
•That sounds like exactly what I need. Does it work with Oregon filings specifically?
0 coins
Aisha Hussain
•Works with any state - it's checking document consistency, not state-specific rules. Really simple to use and gives you immediate answers.
0 coins
GalacticGladiator
Update us when you get this figured out! I'm dealing with Oregon UCC filings next week and want to know what to watch out for.
0 coins
Ravi Choudhury
•Will do! I'm ordering the certified copy tomorrow morning. Fingers crossed it's just a search display issue.
0 coins
GalacticGladiator
•Good luck! This whole thread has been really helpful for understanding what to look for.
0 coins