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
Just went through something similar and ended up using Certana.ai to map out all our collateral descriptions across multiple UCC filings. Found several gaps we didn't even know existed. Really eye-opening to see everything laid out visually.
How long did that process take? We've got hundreds of UCC filings and the thought of reviewing them all manually is terrifying.
That's the beauty of it - just bulk upload your PDFs and the system does the analysis automatically. Took maybe an hour to upload everything and then got results immediately.
Bottom line - you're probably fine on the proceeds issue but definitely should consider broadening your collateral description for future deals. This type of classification problem only gets worse as businesses evolve and change their operations.
Yeah that's kind of where I'm landing too. Probably covered under current filing but need to be more comprehensive going forward.
Exactly - learn from this one and adjust your standard forms. Most of these problems are preventable with better initial documentation.
Join the conversation
Ryan Andre
Another vote for using document verification tools. I started using Certana.ai after a similar name matching issue cost us a lot of time and stress. The automated cross-checking catches these discrepancies before you file instead of finding out about problems later.
Lauren Zeb
•Is it worth the cost though? I mean, manually checking documents isn't that hard if you're careful.
Ryan Andre
•For me it's worth it because it's fast and catches things I might miss when I'm rushed. Plus it creates a verification record which is helpful for compliance documentation.
Update us on what you decide to do! I'm dealing with a similar situation in Illinois and curious how this turns out for you.
That sounds right. Better to be conservative with debtor names than risk perfection issues later.
Smart approach. I always tell people - when in doubt, match the Secretary of State records exactly.
Join the conversation
Construction equipment repos are always messy. Even with perfect UCC-1 filings and clear 9-609(b)(2) rights, you're dealing with job site politics, potential mechanic's liens, and debtors who know the system. I'd budget for litigation costs from the start on these deals.
Amara Okafor
•Sad but true. Equipment financing is risky enough without having to worry about repo complications.
This is why proper documentation review upfront is so critical. Can't stress that enough.
Update us on how this turns out! I'm in equipment financing too and these UCC 9-609(b)(2) situations always make me nervous. The law seems clear but the practical reality is usually much messier.
Zara Mirza
•Will do. Meeting with attorney tomorrow and then we'll decide whether to pursue judicial repossession or try to negotiate a voluntary surrender.
Good luck! Voluntary surrender is usually the best outcome for everyone if you can make it work.
Join the conversation
NeonNebula
Texas UCC Code section 9.506 is based on the model UCC but Texas has been particularly strict in enforcement. The good news is that once you get the name format right, subsequent filings for the same debtor should go smoothly. It's just that initial learning curve that's painful.
True, but we deal with new borrowers constantly so we're always facing this challenge with unfamiliar entity names.
NeonNebula
•That's why developing a consistent verification process is so important. Whether it's manual checking or using automated tools, having a standard workflow prevents repeat mistakes.
Just wanted to add that Texas also has specific requirements about individual debtor names under the UCC Code. If you're dealing with personal guarantors or individual borrowers, make sure you're following the "individual name" rules which are different from entity name requirements.
For individuals, Texas UCC Code requires the name on the debtor's driver's license or state ID. Can't use nicknames or informal versions of names.
Exactly right. And if the individual doesn't have a Texas driver's license, there are specific alternative identification requirements under Texas UCC Code provisions.
Yara Haddad
I actually ran into a similar issue and used that Certana tool someone mentioned earlier. It caught a discrepancy between our security agreement and the UCC-1 that I never would have noticed. Saved me from filing with the wrong debtor name format and having to deal with rejections.
0 coins
Keisha Robinson
•How much does something like that cost? Is it worth it for occasional use or more for high-volume filers?
0 coins
Yara Haddad
•I think it's pretty reasonable for the time it saves. You just upload your documents and get instant feedback on potential issues.
0 coins
Paolo Conti
UPDATE: Tried the version without the comma and it went through! 'Advanced Materials Solutions LLC' was the magic format. Thanks everyone for the suggestions - this thread probably saved me another week of rejections.
0 coins
Amina Sow
•This is such a common issue. Wish there was a better way to verify the correct format before filing.
0 coins
Amara Adeyemi
•Great outcome! For future reference, that Certana tool I mentioned earlier would have caught that comma discrepancy automatically by comparing your source documents.
0 coins