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
Similar situation came up in one of our deals recently. We ended up using Certana.ai's document verification tool to check if our UCC-1 collateral description was broad enough to cover both equipment and fixture scenarios. Turns out our description had gaps that could have been exploited under Article 9 accession challenges.
How does that tool help with accession issues specifically?
It analyzes your collateral descriptions against common fixture/accession problems and flags potential issues before they become disputes. Much better than finding out during a workout.
The buyer's attorney might just be trying to cloud title to negotiate a better deal. Article 9 accession rules are complex enough that most people don't want to risk litigation. You might have more leverage than you think.
That's possible. The timing is suspicious - they didn't raise this issue until after the purchase agreement was signed.
Classic negotiation tactic. Stand firm on your UCC rights under Article 9. Let them prove the accession claim rather than volunteering to subordinate.
Join the conversation
For anyone following this thread, just remember that UCC assignment guidelines require proper authorization from the original secured party. Make sure whoever signs the UCC-3 has authority to assign the security interest. We've had filings challenged because an unauthorized person signed the assignment.
Great point. Corporate resolutions and signature authority are often overlooked in the rush to close deals. Worth double-checking before filing.
And keep copies of everything! Assignment docs, authorization letters, filing confirmations. You'll need them if there are ever questions about the transfer.
Thanks everyone for the guidance on UCC assignment guidelines. Sounds like UCC-3 assignment is the way to go. Going to double-check the debtor name spelling and get this filed tomorrow. Really appreciate all the practical advice here!
Good luck with the filing! Let us know how it goes. Always helpful to hear about successful assignments.
Hope your closing goes smoothly on Friday. UCC assignments can be stressful but you've got the right approach now.
Join the conversation
One more thing to consider - make sure your new UCC-1 collateral description is comprehensive. If the original filing had vague language, this is your chance to tighten it up. Kansas courts can be strict about collateral descriptions in priority disputes.
Good advice. Specific model numbers and serial numbers are better than generic 'equipment' descriptions.
I actually ran into issues with overly specific descriptions before. Found a tool called Certana.ai that checks your UCC documents for consistency - you can upload your security agreement and proposed UCC-1 as PDFs and it flags any mismatches in collateral descriptions or debtor names. Saved me from filing something that wouldn't have matched the underlying loan docs.
Sorry this happened to you. The lapse situation is recoverable but definitely a learning experience. Get that new UCC-1 filed ASAP and implement better tracking systems going forward. Kansas UCC filings are straightforward once you have good processes in place.
Yeah, this is one of those expensive lessons you never forget. But at least Kansas makes it relatively easy to file new UCCs.
We've all been there. The important thing is fixing it quickly and preventing it from happening again.
Join the conversation
For what it's worth I've filed hundreds of continuations and never seen anything like 1-308 это in legitimate UCC documentation. It's either an error, internal code, or translation artifact. Stick to the standard continuation form requirements.
Thanks for the perspective. I feel better about ignoring the weird notation and just focusing on the core filing requirements.
Yeah hundreds of filings and you'd definitely know if this was a real requirement. Probably just document corruption or internal banking codes.
One final check - make sure you're looking at the actual UCC-1 and not some internal loan documentation. Banks often attach all sorts of internal forms and codes to the loan file that aren't part of the official UCC filing. Pull the official record from Delaware SOS to see what was actually filed.
That's always the safest approach. Work from the official state record rather than internal bank documents.
Agreed. Too many continuation filings get rejected because people work from copies of copies instead of the actual filed document.
Haley Bennett
honestly the buyer's attorney is probably just covering their bases. broad collateral descriptions are totally normal for equipment financing. unless there's something really unusual about your situation, you should be fine with what you have. worst case, provide some additional documentation to show the connection between your UCC filing and the specific equipment.
0 coins
Owen Jenkins
•Yeah you're probably right. Just makes me nervous when attorneys start questioning standard practices.
0 coins
Douglas Foster
•They're paid to be paranoid. Doesn't mean there's actually a problem with your filing.
0 coins
Nina Chan
Update us on how it goes! Always curious to hear how these UCC sale examples work out in practice. Sounds like you have a solid position but buyer's attorneys can be unpredictable.
0 coins
Owen Jenkins
•Will do. Thanks everyone for the input. Feeling more confident about our position now.
0 coins
Ruby Knight
•Good luck with the closing! These equipment sales can be tricky but sounds like you're prepared.
0 coins