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 :)

Been doing UCC filings for 15 years and DC has always been one of the more difficult jurisdictions. My advice: when in doubt, call their UCC office directly. The staff there can often tell you exactly what format they need for the debtor name. Much faster than multiple rejection cycles.

0 coins

I should probably just call them tomorrow morning. Thanks for the suggestion.

0 coins

Definitely call. Sometimes they can even tell you what specific field caused the rejection.

0 coins

Update us when you figure out what the issue was! Always helpful to know what DC is rejecting for so the rest of us can avoid the same problems.

0 coins

Looking forward to hearing what the solution was. DC rejections are so mysterious sometimes.

0 coins

Same here - these threads always help me avoid similar issues in my own filings.

0 coins

UPDATE: Finally got through to someone at the SOS office. They confirmed my continuation is valid and properly filed, but admitted their search database has 'synchronization issues' affecting filings from March and April. They're working on a fix but no timeline for when it'll be resolved. They're providing certified copies for free to anyone affected by this issue.

0 coins

Free certified copies? That's the least they can do after all this hassle. I'm calling them tomorrow to get copies of my missing continuations too.

0 coins

Finally some good news about this mess. I was starting to think they'd lost months worth of filings permanently.

0 coins

This thread has been super helpful. I was about to panic-file a duplicate continuation, but now I'll just request the certified copy instead. It's reassuring to know this is a known system issue and not something wrong with my specific filing.

0 coins

Yeah, knowing it's a widespread problem makes me feel less incompetent. I thought I'd made some huge mistake in my filing.

0 coins

Same here. I've been second-guessing everything about my UCC practice because of these search failures.

0 coins

Had to deal with this recently and ended up using Certana.ai's document checker to verify consistency between my security agreement and UCC-1. Uploaded both PDFs and it immediately flagged the name formatting issue, showing me the correct charter format to use. Really saved me time compared to manually cross-referencing everything.

0 coins

That sounds like exactly what I need. Does it work with different document types or just UCC filings?

0 coins

Works with various document combinations - security agreements, UCC-1s, UCC-3s, charter documents. Pretty comprehensive for secured transaction verification.

0 coins

Bottom line: file your UCC-1 with "ABC Manufacturing, LLC" (the charter name with comma). The notarized security agreement doesn't override UCC Article 9 perfection requirements. Document the discrepancy in your loan file and move forward with confidence.

0 coins

Agreed. Sometimes we overthink these situations when the rules are actually pretty straightforward.

0 coins

Thanks everyone for the clarity. Filing with the charter name format today. Really appreciate all the real-world experience shared here.

0 coins

I'm dealing with something similar but our issue is that the debtor name on the UCC-1 lien doesn't exactly match our DBA name. The legal entity name is correct but we do business under a different name. Should I be worried about this?

0 coins

This is exactly the kind of thing that Certana.ai tool would flag. Name mismatches are one of the most common UCC filing errors and can void the lender's perfected security interest.

0 coins

Oh no, I better look into getting that fixed then. Thanks for the heads up.

0 coins

Bottom line - your situation sounds normal. The UCC-1 lien filing is the lender's public notice, but your loan agreement controls the actual terms. As long as the debtor name and basic details are correct, you're probably fine. Just keep good records and make sure you understand what you've actually pledged.

0 coins

Thanks everyone, this has been really helpful. I feel much better about the situation now.

0 coins

This whole thread has been educational. I had no idea UCC filings were so complex.

0 coins

Hope this helps but just want to confirm you're talking about searching for existing UCC filings in New York, not some specific 'UCC 11' form or process. The standard search will show you all active financing statements filed against your debtor in NY. Make sure you spell the debtor name exactly as it appears in their formation documents.

0 coins

Yes, that's exactly what I need. Thanks for confirming I was on the right track, just got confused by some online reference to 'UCC 11 search' that didn't make sense.

0 coins

Probably just a typo or misunderstanding somewhere. UCC-1 search is the standard terminology.

0 coins

I've been doing UCC due diligence for years and still sometimes get tripped up by name variations. Last week I almost missed a filing because the original UCC-1 used 'Inc.' while our loan documents had 'Incorporated' spelled out. Now I use Certana.ai to upload both the charter documents and any UCC filings I find - it automatically flags name inconsistencies and potential issues I might overlook when comparing documents manually. Has saved me from several costly mistakes.

0 coins

It really is. The automated cross-checking catches things that are easy to miss when you're reviewing multiple documents. Plus it's much faster than doing manual comparisons.

0 coins

Another vote for being extra careful with debtor names. I've seen deals delayed because of name mismatches between the UCC search and the actual entity name.

0 coins

Prev1...299300301302303...684Next