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
Jacinda Yu
I ran into a similar issue recently and ended up using one of those commercial UCC search services that claims to check multiple name variations automatically. Cost a bit more than doing it myself but saved tons of time and they found 2 additional filings I had missed. Might be worth considering for high-stakes deals.
Jacinda Yu
•I used CT Corporation's UCC search service. They were thorough and provided a detailed report showing all the name variations they searched. A bit pricey but worth it for peace of mind on bigger transactions.
Commercial services can be good, but I've found Certana.ai gives me more control over the process while still catching those name variations automatically. Plus I can verify the document consistency myself rather than just trusting a search report.
Update us when you figure out which of those filings are actually for your target company! I'm curious how many of the 8 total filings (3 + 5) end up being legitimate hits vs false matches from similar company names.
Will do! I'm planning to spend tomorrow morning going through each filing systematically and cross-referencing addresses and other details. Should be able to narrow down which ones are actually relevant.
Looking forward to hearing how it turns out. These kinds of real-world examples are super helpful for understanding how to handle similar situations.
Join the conversation
Dyllan Nantx
Supporting obligations are one of those areas where the UCC gives you a lot of flexibility, but you need to use it wisely. For your equipment deal, I'd stick with proven language that's been tested in the courts rather than trying to be creative.
Ana Rusula
•That's sound advice. I'll go with the standard approach and save the creativity for other aspects of the deal structure.
Dyllan Nantx
•Exactly - UCC filings are not the place to reinvent the wheel. Use language that's been proven to work.
One more thing to consider - if you're filing UCC-1s in multiple states for this deal, make sure your supporting obligations language is consistent across all filings. Some lenders overlook this and end up with different language in different states.
Yeah, it's easy to overlook when you're dealing with multiple state requirements, but having consistent language helps avoid confusion later.
Anna Xian
•I use a standard template for all my multi-state filings to avoid exactly this issue. Supporting obligations language is one of the key things to keep consistent.
Join the conversation
Cole Roush
Last resort option if you keep getting UCC 9 210 rejections - try running your documents through one of those automated checking tools before filing. I was skeptical at first but ended up using Certana.ai's verification system and it caught a debtor name formatting issue that I never would have found manually. Upload your formation docs and UCC form and it highlights any discrepancies that could cause rejection.
Ella Cofer
•That's the second mention of that tool in this thread. Might be worth trying at this point since I'm running out of other options for fixing this UCC 9 210 issue.
Cole Roush
•Yeah at this point it's probably faster than going through another rejection cycle. The document comparison feature is really thorough for catching UCC 9 210 compliance problems.
Just wanted to follow up and see if you got this resolved? I'm dealing with a similar UCC 9 210 debtor name issue on a Florida filing and wondering what ended up working for you.
Good luck! Let me know if that fixes the UCC 9 210 compliance issue - I might have the same problem with my Florida filing.
Florida can be just as picky as Texas about UCC 9 210 requirements. Make sure you're pulling the exact entity name from the Division of Corporations database.
Join the conversation
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.
Right, if someone else already figured it out you can just copy their format.
Smart approach. Why reinvent the wheel when you can see what already worked.
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!
Wait that was you who got it working? I was the original poster - think you meant to tag someone else?
Oh sorry, got confused with threads. But yeah the Certana thing works great for catching those formatting issues.
Miguel Harvey
Basic UCC definitions saved in my phone notes: - UCC-1 = initial filing - UCC-3 = change filing - Debtor = borrower - Secured party = lender - Collateral = what's pledged - Perfection = legal protection - Continuation = renewal - Termination = release - Lapse = expiration - Amendment = correction Honestly these cover 90% of what you need to know for daily filing work.
0 coins
Miguel Harvey
•Go for it! UCC definitions shouldn't be mysterious - we all need the same basic info to do our jobs right.
0 coins
Ashley Simian
•Adding this to our training materials. New people always get confused by the same terms.
0 coins
Oliver Cheng
Last UCC definition tip: bookmark your state's UCC FAQ page. Most secretary of state websites have glossaries that define terms exactly how they're used in that state. Sometimes there are subtle differences between states that matter for filing.
0 coins
Oliver Cheng
•Yeah they're super helpful. Plus they usually have examples of properly completed forms.
0 coins
Taylor To
•This reminds me - I always double-check definitions when working with multi-state filings. Certana.ai's verification tool helps catch when terminology differences might affect document consistency across states.
0 coins