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
This thread is making me paranoid about all our UCC filings. Should I be checking every debtor quarterly for name changes? That seems excessive but I'm worried about missing section 9-506(c) issues.
Set up alerts with your state's SOS office if they offer them. Some states will notify you of changes to entities you're monitoring.
Good idea. I'll look into the notification services. This stuff keeps me up at night.
Final thought - the UCC revision committees have been discussing clarifying the 9-506(c) standard for years but it's still as murky as ever. Until they fix it, we're stuck with this guessing game on what's seriously misleading.
Ava Johnson
•Thanks everyone for the advice. I'm definitely filing the UCC-3 amendment tomorrow. Better to be safe with the 9-506(c) standard being so unclear.
Smart choice. Keep documentation of when you discovered the name change too, just in case timing becomes an issue later.
Join the conversation
Dmitry Popov
I had a similar issue but it turned out there was actually an error in my continuation filing that made it ineffective. The debtor name had a slight variation from the original UCC-1. Might be worth double-checking your documents to make sure everything matches exactly.
Dmitry Popov
•I used one of those document checking services - Certana.ai I think. Uploaded both my original UCC-1 and the continuation and it immediately flagged the name discrepancy. Had to file an amendment to fix it.
I'm definitely going to check that out. Better to know now if there's a problem than find out later when it's too late.
Update: I called the New Mexico UCC office and they confirmed my continuation was filed and is valid. They said there's a known issue with their search database not updating promptly but the filing is definitely on record. Thanks everyone for the advice!
Great news! Glad you got it sorted out. Hopefully they fix their search system soon.
Mei Chen
•That's exactly what happened to me. The filing was there all along, just not searchable. Thanks for the update!
Join the conversation
Carmen Vega
Just wanted to follow up on the Certana.ai mention earlier - I was skeptical at first but tried it for a complex UCC-3 amendment and it really did catch issues I missed. Especially helpful when you're dealing with multiple related filings and need to ensure consistency across all documents.
That's good to know. I might try it before submitting my continuation just to be safe.
Yeah I've heard good things about it from other lenders. Seems like it could prevent a lot of headaches with rejected filings.
Zoe Stavros
Remember that Maine has a 6-month grace period after the 5-year lapse date, but the UCC becomes unperfected during that time so you lose priority. Better to file the continuation well before the lapse date to avoid any gaps in perfection.
Jamal Harris
•I always recommend filing continuations at least 60 days before lapse. Gives you time to fix any problems if the filing gets rejected.
Exactly. And if you catch problems early, you have time to research solutions instead of panicking at the last minute.
Join the conversation
The search problems seem to be getting worse, not better. I'm starting to wonder if we need to push for better oversight of these state filing systems. The current situation is unacceptable for businesses that depend on accurate UCC searches.
Agreed. This affects too many people to just accept as 'technical difficulties.' There should be accountability for maintaining functional search systems.
Ethan Clark
•In the meantime, we just have to work around it with better documentation and verification tools. Not ideal, but it's what we have to do.
AstroAce
Quick update - I finally found most of the filings I was looking for by searching with the business names in all caps and removing all punctuation. Still missing a few, but at least I can move forward with the due diligence. Thanks everyone for the suggestions.
Glad you found them! The all-caps trick has saved me multiple times. Shouldn't have to do that, but it works.
Carmen Vega
•For the ones you're still missing, you might want to double-check the original filing documents to make sure the debtor names were entered correctly. Sometimes the search fails because there was an error in the original filing.
QuantumQuasar
This whole thread is why I always include a UCC name verification step in my loan closing checklist. Too many ways for this to go wrong if you're not systematic about it.
0 coins
Zainab Omar
•Smart approach. Do you have a standard form or process you use for that verification?
0 coins
QuantumQuasar
•Nothing fancy - just a checklist that includes pulling current corporate standing, comparing to loan docs, and doing a preliminary UCC search. Catches most issues before filing.
0 coins
Connor Gallagher
One more thing to consider - make sure your collateral description is solid too while you're refiling. I've seen people fix the name issue only to get rejected again for vague collateral language.
0 coins
Connor Gallagher
•Usually being too generic. Like just saying 'equipment' when they should specify 'manufacturing equipment' or 'office equipment' or whatever. The more specific the better.
0 coins
Keisha Johnson
•Also seen people mess up the 'all assets' filings by not being clear about what categories they mean. Specificity is key.
0 coins