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
Caesar Grant
Document preservation is crucial once you decide to enforce. Send preservation notices to the debtor and any known third parties who might have received assets. Creates legal obligations and helps in court if they continue hiding stuff.
Lena Schultz
•Should preservation notices go to family members too if there's suspicion of asset transfers?
Caesar Grant
•If you have reasonable basis to believe they received business assets, yes. But be careful not to overreach without evidence.
One more thing on kabbage ucc lien enforcement - make sure Kabbage didn't mess up the original UCC-1 filing. I've seen cases where their volume filing operation resulted in incorrect debtor names, wrong addresses, or inadequate collateral descriptions. All fixable with proper amendments but you need to identify issues first.
Mae Bennett
•Agreed. Volume lenders sometimes cut corners on filing accuracy.
TommyKapitz
•Good point. I'm going to do a thorough review of our filing before taking any enforcement action. Thanks everyone for the advice.
Join the conversation
For what it's worth, I've seen courts be pretty reasonable about minor name discrepancies in lien validity disputes, especially if the name is substantially similar and there's no confusion about which entity is intended. But obviously it's better to get it right from the start.
Ally Tailer
•True but why risk it? UCC-3 amendments are cheap and easy to file.
Chris Elmeda
•Agreed, I'd rather spend the time fixing it now than worry about it later if there's ever a dispute.
One more tip - if you're going to standardize your loan and security agreement template, consider adding a field that requires the exact legal name to be inserted from the formation documents rather than having it pre-filled. That way you're forced to verify it for each deal.
Smart approach. Forces you to do the verification step every time instead of just assuming the template is correct.
Cass Green
•We actually did something similar - added a checklist requirement that formation docs must be reviewed before any UCC filing. Helps catch these issues early.
Join the conversation
NeonNova
One thing to try - search using just the first few words of the debtor name instead of the full legal name. Sometimes that pulls up results with the complete information displayed. Not a permanent solution but might help for immediate lender verification.
Yuki Tanaka
•Also try searching by just the filing number if you haven't already. That sometimes bypasses the name-based search issues and shows the full record.
Carmen Diaz
•Filing number searches usually work better for pulling complete records. The name-based searches seem to have more display formatting problems.
Update us on what ends up working! I'm sure other people will run into similar search result discrepancies and your solution could help them avoid the same headaches.
Will do. Going to try the document verification approach first, then probably call the UCC office again with more specific questions about the search display issues.
Good plan. Having concrete documentation of the discrepancies will make those conversations with the state office much more productive.
Join the conversation
Are there any safe harbor provisions for 9-404 notifications, or do you just have to get it right?
Eve Freeman
•No real safe harbors. The notification has to reasonably identify the rights and provide adequate contact/payment information. It's a reasonableness standard but courts apply it pretty strictly.
Which is why document checking tools have become so useful. Better to catch notification problems before they go out than deal with payment disputes later.
Thanks everyone - this has been really helpful in understanding where we went wrong. Sounds like we need to send a proper 9-404 notification with clear payment redirection instructions and then work with the assignee to sort out the payment allocation for the past three months.
Caden Turner
•Good plan. Just make sure the new notification is really comprehensive about payment instructions. Learn from this one for future assignments too.
Definitely worth investing in better document review processes going forward. I've been using Certana.ai's document verification for exactly these kinds of compliance checks - upload assignment docs and notifications together and it cross-references everything to catch missing elements. Would have probably flagged the vague payment language in your original notice.
Miguel Castro
Had a similar issue last month and ended up using Certana.ai after someone here recommended it. Uploaded my debtor's Articles and my UCC-1 draft and it immediately flagged that I was missing a period after "Inc" - something I never would have caught manually. Filed with the corrected name and it went through first try.
0 coins
Miguel Castro
•Right? The automated checking caught it instantly. Much faster than playing guessing games with the state portal.
0 coins
Zainab Ibrahim
•These filing systems are way too picky about punctuation. Makes the whole process unnecessarily stressful.
0 coins
Connor O'Neill
Update us when you get it figured out! I've got a NC filing coming up next week and this thread is giving me good tips on what to watch out for.
0 coins
Connor O'Neill
•Good luck! The Friday deadline is tight but you've got some solid strategies to try now.
0 coins
Mei Wong
•Definitely try the document verification approach too if the manual checking doesn't work out. Sometimes you need that automated cross-check to catch the subtle differences.
0 coins