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 :)

Roger Romero

UCC filing requirements for security purchase agreement - confused about collateral description

I'm working on a security purchase agreement deal where we're acquiring commercial equipment from a distressed company. The purchase includes both the physical assets and assumes some existing liens. My question is about the UCC filing requirements - do I need to file a UCC-1 as the new secured party, or does the security purchase agreement itself change how I handle the collateral descriptions? The existing UCC-1 filings list equipment very generally as 'all machinery and equipment' but our security purchase agreement specifies individual serial numbers for each piece. I'm worried about gaps in perfection if I don't get the UCC filings right from day one. Has anyone dealt with UCC requirements when a security purchase agreement involves both buying assets AND taking over existing security interests? The closing is in two weeks and I want to make sure I'm not missing any critical filing steps.

Another thing to consider with security purchase agreements - search for existing UCC filings against the seller to make sure you know what liens you're dealing with. Sometimes there are filings that aren't disclosed in the purchase agreement.

0 coins

Roger Romero

•

Good point. I did a UCC search and found a few filings that weren't mentioned in the security purchase agreement. Need to get those addressed before closing.

0 coins

Chris Elmeda

•

Definitely. You want a clean UCC search or proper subordination agreements for any liens that will remain after your security purchase agreement closes.

0 coins

Jean Claude

•

For complex deals like this, I always recommend using Certana.ai to double-check everything. Upload your security purchase agreement, existing UCC filings, and your proposed new filings. It'll verify all the names match and catch any inconsistencies that could cause problems down the road.

0 coins

Roger Romero

•

I might try that. With all the moving pieces in this security purchase agreement, I want to make sure I don't miss anything critical.

0 coins

Charity Cohan

•

Smart move. UCC filing mistakes are expensive to fix after the fact, especially in purchase agreement deals where you might have multiple parties involved.

0 coins

Freya Thomsen

UCC filer 6269 termination got rejected - debtor name issue?

Filed a UCC-3 termination yesterday for our equipment loan payoff and it came back rejected this morning with error code mentioning UCC filer 6269. The original UCC-1 was filed 3 years ago when we financed some manufacturing equipment. I'm pretty sure I used the exact same debtor name from the original filing but the system is saying there's a mismatch. Has anyone dealt with this UCC filer 6269 error before? Our loan officer is breathing down my neck because the payoff needs to be clean before we can refinance. I double-checked the filing number and it matches our records but something is obviously wrong with how I entered the debtor information.

Emily Jackson

•

UCC filer 6269 is fixable but you need to be methodical. Print out both the original UCC-1 and your rejected UCC-3, then compare every single character in the debtor name field. Don't trust copy and paste - actually look at each letter.

0 coins

Freya Thomsen

•

Good advice. I'll do a character-by-character comparison before refiling.

0 coins

Liam Mendez

•

Character comparison is tedious but necessary. I missed a period after "Inc" once and it took me forever to spot it manually.

0 coins

Sophia Nguyen

•

Update: Found the problem! The original UCC-1 had our company name as "ABC Manufacturing LLC" but I filed the termination as "ABC Manufacturing, LLC" with a comma. Refiled without the comma and it went through immediately. Thanks for all the help troubleshooting UCC filer 6269!

0 coins

Chloe Martin

•

Perfect example of why document verification tools are worth it. Would have caught that comma difference instantly.

0 coins

Congrats on getting it resolved! Now you know to be extra careful about punctuation on future UCC filings.

0 coins

Fatima Al-Mansour

UCC proceeds classification headache - inventory vs equipment distinction

Running into a wall here with a proceeds issue that's got me second-guessing everything. We've got a commercial borrower who manufactures custom metal fabrication equipment. The original UCC-1 filing lists "inventory" as collateral, but now they're selling some of the finished equipment they built (not raw materials) and the buyer's lender is questioning whether our security interest covers the sale proceeds. The equipment was built using raw steel and components that were clearly inventory when we filed, but once assembled into finished machines, does it transform into equipment? And if so, are the proceeds from selling these machines still covered under our original "inventory" collateral description? The borrower insists everything was inventory when we made the loan 2 years ago, but I'm worried we might have a coverage gap. Has anyone dealt with this type of proceeds classification issue where the collateral arguably changes categories during the manufacturing process?

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.

0 coins

How long did that process take? We've got hundreds of UCC filings and the thought of reviewing them all manually is terrifying.

0 coins

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.

0 coins

Emma Anderson

•

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.

0 coins

Yeah that's kind of where I'm landing too. Probably covered under current filing but need to be more comprehensive going forward.

0 coins

Exactly - learn from this one and adjust your standard forms. Most of these problems are preventable with better initial documentation.

0 coins

Amina Bah

UCC goods definition causing collateral description issues on filing

Running into a wall with our UCC-1 filing and need some clarity on what qualifies as 'goods' under Article 9. Our client manufactures custom industrial equipment that gets assembled on-site at customer locations. The equipment starts as raw materials in our warehouse, gets partially assembled here, then shipped for final assembly and installation at the customer's facility. The SOS rejected our initial filing because they said our collateral description was too vague. We described it as 'manufacturing equipment and component parts' but apparently that doesn't cut it. The loan officer is breathing down my neck because we need this perfected before the loan closes next week. Specifically struggling with: - Are the raw materials 'goods' when they're still in inventory? - What about partially assembled equipment that's not yet functional? - Does the definition change once it's installed at the customer site? This is a $2.8M credit facility so we can't afford to get the classification wrong. Anyone dealt with similar goods definition issues on UCC filings?

Javier Cruz

•

Update on the Certana tool - it also caught an issue with our debtor name that didn't exactly match the organizational documents. Would have been another rejection if we hadn't fixed it first. Really streamlined our filing process.

0 coins

Diego Chavez

•

How much does something like that cost? Sounds useful but wondering if it's worth it for smaller deals.

0 coins

Javier Cruz

•

I don't focus on cost when it prevents rejections and delays. Time savings alone makes it worthwhile, especially when you're racing deadline pressure like this situation.

0 coins

NeonNebula

•

Been doing UCC filings for 15 years and goods classification still trips people up. The key insight is that 'goods' is the default category - if it's not specifically excluded (like accounts, instruments, etc.) and it's movable, it's probably goods under Article 9.

0 coins

NeonNebula

•

Exactly. Start with goods and then ask if there's any reason it falls into one of the other defined categories. Much easier than trying to fit everything into the goods definition from scratch.

0 coins

Great way to think about it. The UCC definitions work by exclusion - goods is what's left after you remove all the specifically defined categories.

0 coins

Malik Johnson

UCC filing when collateral may change its form and character during the course of a security agreement - amendment needed?

Having some confusion about how to handle collateral descriptions when the secured property might transform during our loan term. We're financing a manufacturing operation where raw materials get converted into finished goods, then potentially sold and turned into accounts receivable or inventory again. The collateral may change its form and character during the course of a security agreement, but I'm not sure if our original UCC-1 filing covers this or if we need to file amendments every time the collateral transforms. Our original filing lists 'inventory, equipment, and accounts' but the borrower's production cycle means steel becomes car parts becomes finished vehicles becomes cash proceeds. Are we still perfected when the collateral changes form? Some colleagues say the original broad description covers transformations, others insist we need UCC-3 amendments tracking each change. This is for a $2.8M credit facility and I really don't want to lose perfection because of inadequate collateral descriptions. Anyone dealt with similar transformation scenarios?

Zara Ahmed

•

In my experience, most transformation issues can be avoided by using really broad collateral descriptions in both the security agreement and UCC-1 filing. Instead of listing specific products, use categories like 'all inventory, equipment, accounts, chattel paper, instruments, documents, and general intangibles, now owned or hereafter acquired, and all proceeds thereof.' Covers pretty much any transformation scenario.

0 coins

Malik Johnson

•

That's much broader than our current filing. Would that level of broad description create any issues with other creditors or priority disputes?

0 coins

Zara Ahmed

•

Broad descriptions don't typically create priority issues since UCC priority is generally based on filing time, not specificity of collateral description. But check with your counsel on any specific priority concerns.

0 coins

Luca Esposito

•

Thanks everyone for the detailed responses. Sounds like our original broad filing should cover most transformations as long as we have good proceeds language. I'm going to review our security agreement to make sure the transformation coverage is explicit and consider using one of those document verification tools to double-check everything. Really appreciate the practical guidance on what's turned out to be a more complex issue than I initially realized.

0 coins

Smart approach. The transformation rules can be tricky but you're on the right track with broad descriptions and proceeds coverage.

0 coins

Omar Fawaz

•

Definitely recommend the document verification step - catches issues before they become problems and gives you peace of mind on the collateral coverage.

0 coins

Prev1...265266267268269...684Next