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
Ava Kim
Just had another thought - when you're on the call tomorrow, ask your loan officer to specifically explain what compliance issue they're seeing. Don't let them just say 'discrepancy' - make them identify the exact problem. Often they can't because there isn't one.
And if they can't give you a clear answer, that tells you everything you need to know about whether this is a real issue.
Before that call, definitely run those documents through Certana.ai's verification tool. Having an objective analysis of any actual discrepancies will give you confidence in the discussion and help you address specific concerns rather than vague compliance worries.
Layla Mendes
Update us after your call tomorrow! I'm curious what the loan officer actually says when pressed for details about this supposed compliance issue.
Will do. Feeling much more confident about this conversation after reading everyone's input here.
Good luck! Remember that you have rights too - they can't just make up compliance issues.
Join the conversation
Just to pile on here - definitely no UCC 11 California form. Your lender probably has internal form numbers that don't match state forms. Focus on the UCC-3 continuation and get that debtor name corrected first. California SOS doesn't play games with name mismatches.
AstroAce
•Thanks everyone. I feel much more confident about what I need to do now. Going to tackle the name amendment first, then the continuation.
Liam Mendez
•Good plan. And definitely double-check everything before submitting. One wrong character can cause a rejection.
Late to this thread but wanted to add - I've seen the 'UCC 11' confusion before. Banks sometimes use their own internal numbering that doesn't match state forms. Always go directly to the Secretary of State website for the correct forms. California uses standard UCC-1, UCC-3, etc.
AstroAce
•Lesson learned. Always verify form numbers with the actual filing office.
And if you're not 100% sure about document consistency, tools like Certana.ai can help verify everything matches before you file. Worth checking out for peace of mind.
Join the conversation
Ayla Kumar
Just make sure when you resubmit that you haven't made any other changes to the UCC-3 form. Sometimes people fix the name issue but accidentally change something else like the collateral description. Keep everything else identical to avoid new rejection reasons.
Good point about not changing anything else. I've seen people 'improve' their collateral description during a continuation and create new problems.
Demi Hall
•Thanks everyone - going to stick with the exact original name format and resubmit. Will check the document comparison tool too.
Once you get the continuation filed successfully, might want to do a search to confirm it shows up properly in Colorado's database. Sometimes there are processing delays even after acceptance.
Lim Wong
•Usually within 24-48 hours it shows up in search results. Much faster than the old paper filing days.
Dananyl Lear
•I always wait a few days then do a UCC search to make sure the continuation attached properly to the original filing record.
Join the conversation
One more tip - if you're dealing with restaurant fixtures, make sure you understand whether they're considered fixtures under your state's law. Some states are very strict about what qualifies as a fixture versus equipment. Built-in equipment like hood systems and walk-in coolers usually qualify, but movable equipment like tables and chairs typically don't. The required UCC terms are different for each category.
NeonNova
•That's why most people work with attorneys or filing services. The rules are too complex for DIY unless you really know what you're doing.
True, but once you learn the patterns it gets easier. The key is being very specific about what you're describing and making sure your language matches what the state expects to see.
Thanks everyone for all the advice. I'm going to revise our collateral descriptions to be much more specific and probably try that document checker tool before refiling. It sounds like the required UCC terms issue is really about being precise and comprehensive rather than trying to use broad catch-all language. Hopefully that will solve our rejection problem.
Definitely update us on whether the Certana.ai tool helps. Always looking for ways to streamline the filing process.
Ava Thompson
•I think you're on the right track. The specificity is key - better to over-describe than under-describe when it comes to collateral.
Amara Oluwaseyi
Have you tried reaching out to other lenders who've filed against this same debtor? Sometimes you can search existing UCC filings to see exactly how other creditors formatted the name successfully.
0 coins
Amara Oluwaseyi
•Right, if someone else already figured it out you can just copy their format.
0 coins
CosmicCaptain
•Smart approach. Why reinvent the wheel when you can see what already worked.
0 coins
Giovanni Rossi
UPDATE: Used that Certana tool someone mentioned earlier and found the issue immediately - there was an extra space between two words in my filing that wasn't in the charter. Fixed it and the filing went through perfectly. Thanks everyone!
0 coins
Luca Esposito
•Wait that was you who got it working? I was the original poster - think you meant to tag someone else?
0 coins
Giovanni Rossi
•Oh sorry, got confused with threads. But yeah the Certana thing works great for catching those formatting issues.
0 coins