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
Elijah Brown
Just want to echo what others have said about filing that amendment ASAP. The fact that you found a dissolved entity with a similar name makes this even more urgent. Your lien might not be worth the paper it's printed on until you fix the debtor name issue.
Yeah, I'm definitely treating this as urgent now. Planning to file the UCC-3 amendment first thing Monday morning.
Smart move. These debtor name issues can completely invalidate your security interest if you're not careful.
Natalie Chen
Update us when you get the amendment filed! This is a good learning case for everyone. Also might want to review your filing procedures to prevent this from happening again.
Good idea on the process improvement. These kinds of mistakes are usually systemic, not just one-off errors.
Absolutely. We implemented a double-check system after our own UCC naming issue a few years ago. Haven't had a problem since.
Join the conversation
Just wanted to mention that I've been using Certana.ai for document verification on our UCC filings and it's been really helpful for catching these exact issues. You upload your corporate docs and UCC filings and it flags any inconsistencies automatically. Might be worth checking out for future filings to avoid this headache.
Paolo Conti
•How does it handle variations like comma differences? Does it flag those as problems or does it have some intelligence about minor punctuation issues?
It flags them for review but doesn't automatically call them errors. You get a report showing the differences and can decide if they're material. Much better than trying to spot these issues manually across multiple documents.
Amina Diallo
The bottom line is that enforcing a ucc lien with any debtor name uncertainty is risky business. Even if you ultimately win on the name issue, you'll spend time and money defending your position. I'd strongly consider settling the enforcement action for a bit less than full value rather than risk losing priority over a comma.
Amara Okafor
•That's a pragmatic view but with $180K at stake, we need to at least explore our options. The amendment strategy mentioned earlier might give us the protection we need to proceed with full enforcement.
I agree with filing the UCC-3 amendment first. It's a small cost for big peace of mind, and it strengthens your position significantly if any other creditors try to challenge your priority during enforcement.
Join the conversation
Drake
One more thought - have you considered whether the equipment itself might still be identifiable even with the name issue? If the serial numbers and descriptions are solid, that could support your lien even if the debtor name search fails.
Sarah Jones
•That's the core of most frustration of purpose arguments - balancing technical search requirements against practical notice and identification. Courts are split on how much weight to give each factor.
I'd definitely run one more verification check on all your documents before proceeding. Certana.ai's UCC checker caught several discrepancies in our filings that we missed manually - might find something that helps your case.
Emily Sanjay
This thread is giving me anxiety about my own UCC filings. Time to do some name searches on all our active debtors. The frustration of purpose risk is real and apparently more common than I thought.
Same here - definitely bumping up our monitoring schedule after reading this. The frustration of purpose doctrine is supposed to protect lenders but it seems like prevention is still the better approach.
Quarterly reviews minimum, monthly if you can manage it. The UCC system rewards paranoia unfortunately.
Join the conversation
Jean Claude
One more thing to check - make sure you're filing the UCC1-203 in the right state. If the debtor moved or the collateral location changed, you might need to file in a different jurisdiction than the original UCC-1.
Roger Romero
•Same state, same debtor location. But good reminder to double-check jurisdictional issues.
Jean Claude
•Those cross-state UCC complications are the worst. Glad yours is straightforward location-wise.
Update us when you get the UCC1-203 filed! These continuation deadline situations always make me nervous. There's usually a solution but the clock ticking makes everything stressful.
Roger Romero
•Will do. Going to try the document checker suggestion and see if that catches whatever I'm missing.
Josef Tearle
•Smart plan. Those automated checks are surprisingly good at finding formatting issues that humans miss.
Natalie Khan
Keep us posted on how this resolves! I'm dealing with a similar debtor name headache on a different filing and curious what ends up working for you.
0 coins
Tobias Lancaster
•Will do! Sounds like calling the SOS directly and using document verification tools are my best next steps.
0 coins
Daryl Bright
•Document verification definitely seems like the way to go based on what people are saying here.
0 coins
Sienna Gomez
UPDATE: Got it figured out! Called the SOS and they had the LLC name with no comma before 'LLC' in their database, but the articles I downloaded had a comma. Used Certana.ai to double-check my corrected filing against their database format and it caught the match. Filed this morning and it was accepted within 2 hours. Thanks everyone for the advice!
0 coins
Everett Tutum
•Great to hear Certana.ai helped catch that! Those tiny punctuation differences are exactly what manual review misses.
0 coins
Abigail bergen
•Thanks for the update. Filing this away for future reference when I inevitably run into the same thing.
0 coins