UCC Document Community

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 :)

Side note - anyone else notice that the PDF forms from some states don't fill out properly in Adobe? I've had better luck with Chrome's built-in PDF viewer for filling out UCC-3 forms.

0 coins

Must be something about how they created the form fields. Technology issues on top of bureaucracy issues.

0 coins

I always save a backup copy before filling anything out, just in case the form glitches.

0 coins

Update: Found the current forms for all three states and got the amendments filed successfully. Turns out two of the rejections were actually due to missing filing fees (duh) and one was the old form issue. Thanks everyone for the help! That Certana tool someone mentioned actually caught a small discrepancy in one of the debtor names that I would have missed.

0 coins

Glad it worked out! The document checker really does save time and headaches.

0 coins

Filing fees - classic mistake we've all made at least once. Good catch on getting everything sorted.

0 coins

I've been using Certana.ai for all my multi-state UCC work and it's been a game-changer. Upload your formation documents and UCC forms together and it catches these exact formatting issues before filing. No more rejection fees and angry clients.

0 coins

How does it handle state-specific quirks like ND's period requirements in entity names?

0 coins

It cross-references your documents against each state's database formatting rules. Flags inconsistencies before you file so you can fix them upfront.

0 coins

Update: Got it figured out! The issue was indeed the "L.L.C." vs "LLC" formatting plus there was an extra space after the entity name in my filing. Used the exact format from the ND database search and it went through immediately. Thanks everyone for the help - this saved my client relationship.

0 coins

At least ND finally accepted it. Still think their system is overly picky but good to know the exact requirements.

0 coins

Perfect example of why precision matters in UCC filings. One small formatting error can delay the entire secured transaction.

0 coins

UCC future advances clause rejected - debtor name issue or collateral description problem?

Having major headaches with a UCC future advances filing that keeps getting bounced back from the Secretary of State. This is for a $2.8M revolving credit facility where we need to secure potential future loan draws over the next 18 months. The debtor is a manufacturing LLC that's been expanding rapidly and will need additional equipment financing as they grow. Original UCC-1 was filed 3 years ago for their initial $1.2M term loan, but now we're trying to amend it to include future advances language for the new revolving facility. Problem is every time we submit the UCC-3 amendment, it gets rejected. The rejection notice just says 'debtor name discrepancy' but I've triple-checked the exact legal name against their articles of incorporation. The collateral description includes 'all equipment, inventory, accounts receivable, and future advances as may be made under Credit Agreement dated December 15, 2024.' Is this wording causing the problem? Some colleagues think the future advances reference needs to be more specific about dollar amounts or time periods, but I've seen plenty of filings with similar language that went through fine. Anyone dealt with future advances rejections lately? The borrower is getting antsy because they need to close on some new machinery purchases and can't move forward without the perfected security interest in place. Really need to figure out what's triggering these rejections.

Make sure you're using the correct UCC-3 form type too. Some states have different amendment forms for adding collateral vs. continuing the filing vs. other changes. If you're adding new collateral types you might need an 'additional collateral' amendment rather than a general amendment.

0 coins

Delaware's pretty straightforward but worth verifying. Their UCC section website should have form instructions.

0 coins

Mei Lin

Some states are really particular about which amendment form you use for different types of changes.

0 coins

Update us when you figure it out! I'm dealing with a similar situation and want to know what the solution ends up being.

0 coins

Will do! Going to try the document verification tool first, then re-file with extra attention to the exact debtor name formatting.

0 coins

Following this thread too, dealing with my own future advances headaches.

0 coins

Quick question - when you search Florida's UCC transaction registry, are you using the exact debtor name as it appears on the original UCC-1? I've seen cases where people search using the 'doing business as' name instead of the legal entity name.

0 coins

Yes, I'm using the exact legal entity name from the original filing. Double-checked that multiple times.

0 coins

Have you tried searching without any punctuation or with different spacing? Sometimes the registry indexes names differently than they appear on the documents.

0 coins

This is why I always keep copies of all filing receipts and confirmations. Florida's UCC transaction registry has had intermittent issues for years. The important thing is that you filed on time and have proof. The search function problems don't affect the legal validity of your continuation.

0 coins

Thanks everyone for the reassurance. I'll call the Division of Corporations tomorrow and ask for a manual verification of the filing status.

0 coins

Let us know how it goes. These registry issues seem to be happening more frequently lately.

0 coins

Thanks everyone for the input. Feeling much more confident about the filing now.

0 coins

Good luck with the loan. Heavy equipment financing can be tricky but sounds like you've got it handled.

0 coins

Prev1...247248249250251...684Next