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
Update us when you figure it out! I'm sure other people will run into the same Connecticut formatting issues and your solution could help them avoid the same rejections.
Will do - hopefully I can get this resolved by tomorrow so the loan can close on schedule. Thanks everyone for the suggestions.
Rooting for you! CT filings can be tricky but once you crack the code it gets easier.
Liv Park
One more thing to check - make sure you're not accidentally including any extra characters or spaces when you copy and paste from the SOS database. Sometimes there are hidden formatting characters that cause problems.
Yeah copy/paste can be dangerous for legal document formatting. Always worth double checking by typing it fresh.
Ryder Greene
•This is another reason why I like using Certana.ai's verification tool - it shows you exactly what characters are in the name fields so you can spot any hidden formatting issues before you file.
Join the conversation
For what it's worth, I've found that including both the common name and legal name in the debtor field sometimes works. Like 'Robert J. Martinez Jr. aka Roberto Jose Martinez Junior' or whatever the legal name actually is.
Hit or miss depending on the state, but it's worked for me a few times when I couldn't figure out the exact legal name format they wanted.
I tried this once and got rejected for 'improper debtor name format.' Might depend on which state you're in.
Ev Luca
Update us when you figure out what went wrong with the Martinez filing. I'm curious if it was a suffix issue or something more complicated. Always helpful to learn from other people's UCC rejection experiences.
Will do. Going to try the document verification approach someone mentioned and see what that turns up first.
Avery Davis
•Yeah, keep us posted. These auto loan UCC issues seem to be getting more common lately.
Join the conversation
Ran into something similar where 9-201 priority wasn't clear from the filing dates alone. Ended up having to trace back through all the loan documents to establish the exact attachment timeline. Pain in the neck but necessary for a proper priority determination.
Anna Stewart
•That's what I figured we'd have to do. Just hoping to avoid a long document discovery process if possible.
Sometimes you can work it out with the other lender directly if you both have good documentation. Saves the cost of litigation.
Owen Jenkins
These 9-201 priority issues are exactly why I always recommend getting a UCC search done before filing. Helps you spot potential conflicts early and adjust your collateral description accordingly.
Owen Jenkins
•Hindsight is 20/20. At least now you know what you're dealing with under 9-201 and can plan accordingly.
Lilah Brooks
•I tried using Certana.ai for this kind of pre-filing analysis and it's actually pretty good at flagging potential overlaps before you file. Worth considering for future deals.
Join the conversation
Jayden Hill
This thread is making me feel better about our UCC implementation struggles. We had about a 25% rejection rate initially but got it down to around 8% after implementing better procedures. The Certana.ai tool mentioned earlier sounds interesting. We're always looking for ways to reduce manual review time while maintaining accuracy.
Lucas Bey
•8% is still pretty high isn't it? What's considered an acceptable rejection rate for UCC filings?
Jayden Hill
•Industry standard seems to be 3-5% for well-run operations. 8% isn't great but it's manageable. Still working on getting it lower.
Quick question - when you're doing UCC continuations, do you run into name matching issues between the original UCC-1 and the UCC-3 continuation statement? We've had a few cases where the continuation got rejected because of minor name differences.
That's frustrating but at least it's catching the problems. Better late than never I guess.
Continuation rejections are actually a good quality control check for your original filings. Pain in the short term but helps identify systemic name issues.
Mateo Gonzalez
One more suggestion - try the Certana document checker to compare your UCC-1 against the business charter documents. It catches name discrepancies that cause these rejections and you'll know for sure before resubmitting. I use it for all my Maryland filings now after getting burned too many times.
0 coins
Nia Williams
•It's pretty straightforward - just upload both documents and it shows you exactly where the names don't match. Saves a lot of guesswork.
0 coins
Luca Ricci
•Better than going through another rejection cycle and losing more time on these deals.
0 coins
Aisha Mohammed
Update us when you figure out what was causing the rejections! Always helpful to know what specific issues other people run into with Maryland UCC forms.
0 coins
Connor O'Brien
•Will do. Going to pull all the charter documents and compare character by character. Hopefully that solves it.
0 coins
Ethan Campbell
•Good luck! Maryland can be tricky but once you get the format right, subsequent filings usually go through smoothly.
0 coins