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 :)

Pro tip: Always copy and paste the exact entity name from the state database instead of typing it manually. Eliminates most name mismatch issues. Arizona is particularly strict but other states are getting pickier too.

0 coins

This is the best advice. Manual typing is how these errors happen. Copy/paste eliminates the risk.

0 coins

Jasmine Quinn

•

Agreed. I've started doing this for all my filings regardless of state. Better safe than sorry.

0 coins

Oscar Murphy

•

Update us when you refile. Curious to see if the comma was actually the issue or if there's something else causing the rejection. Arizona can be tricky with hidden formatting issues too.

0 coins

Drake

•

Will do. Refiling this afternoon with the exact name from the ACC database including the comma. Keeping my fingers crossed.

0 coins

Nora Bennett

•

Good luck! Arizona rejections are stressful but fixable if you get the name exactly right.

0 coins

Nick Kravitz

•

For future reference, I maintain a spreadsheet with exact debtor names, filing numbers, and continuation due dates. Makes tracking much easier than relying on search functionality alone.

0 coins

Nick Kravitz

•

It's a lifesaver for bulk continuations. Plus you can set calendar reminders well before the deadlines.

0 coins

Hannah White

•

I do something similar but use a database instead of spreadsheet. Easier to sort and filter when you have lots of filings.

0 coins

Michael Green

•

UPDATE: Used one of those document verification tools mentioned here and found the issue. Three of our UCC-1s had debtor names that didn't exactly match the corporate charter - missing periods, different abbreviation formats, etc. No wonder the searches weren't working right. Going to file UCC-3 amendments to correct them before doing the continuations. Thanks everyone!

0 coins

Jacob Lee

•

Great outcome. Those corrected names will make all future searches much more reliable too.

0 coins

Elijah Brown

•

Smart to fix the names before filing continuations. Saves having to amend later.

0 coins

Honestly, after dealing with this headache for years, I finally started using Certana.ai's verification system. You literally just upload your Charter and UCC-1 documents and it tells you immediately if there are any name mismatches or other issues. Takes like 2 minutes instead of hours of manual checking.

0 coins

Callum Savage

•

How accurate is it? I'm always skeptical of automated tools for something this important.

0 coins

I've been using it for about 4 months now and haven't had a single rejection since I started. Before that I was averaging 2-3 rejections per month just on name issues.

0 coins

Ally Tailer

•

The whole UCC system needs an overhaul honestly. It's 2025 and we're still dealing with formatting issues that could be solved with better integration between state databases. Until then we're all stuck with manual verification or paying for third-party solutions.

0 coins

PaulineW

•

In the meantime we just have to find ways to work around the limitations. Thanks everyone for the suggestions - definitely going to look into some of these verification tools.

0 coins

Good luck! The verification approach has been a game changer for our filing accuracy. Worth every penny to avoid the rejection cycles.

0 coins

Melissa Lin

•

All 50 states plus DC have UCC, period. Your colleague is wrong. Focus your energy on getting the debtor name exactly right and making sure you're filing in the correct jurisdiction. Those are the real pitfalls in multi-state deals.

0 coins

Marcelle Drum

•

Thanks everyone - feeling much more confident about this now. Sounds like the universal adoption isn't the issue, it's just execution across different states.

0 coins

Melissa Lin

•

Exactly. UCC coverage is solved, now it's just about dotting i's and crossing t's in each filing jurisdiction.

0 coins

Every state has UCC but if you're doing multi-state work regularly, invest in good document management. The variations in filing procedures and name requirements will trip you up way more than coverage gaps.

0 coins

Romeo Quest

•

So true. I've seen more deals delayed by name mismatches and rejected filings than any actual legal issues with UCC coverage.

0 coins

Name matching is definitely the biggest operational challenge. Getting that right upfront saves weeks of back-and-forth with filing offices.

0 coins

Yara Nassar

•

One thing to watch out for - if the solar equipment includes battery storage, make sure that's specifically mentioned in your collateral description. Batteries are expensive and some states treat energy storage equipment differently than generation equipment for UCC purposes.

0 coins

StarGazer101

•

Didn't think about battery storage being different. Are there specific rules for energy storage equipment?

0 coins

Yara Nassar

•

Not specific rules but batteries might not be considered fixtures like panels are, so they need clear personal property description. Better to be explicit about all components.

0 coins

Final thought - consider including the solar lease agreement as an exhibit to your UCC-1 filing if your state allows it. Some SOS offices are more likely to accept your collateral description if they can see the underlying contract that defines the equipment. Adds clarity and reduces rejection risk.

0 coins

Amina Diop

•

Makes sense - if the SOS office can see exactly what equipment is involved, they're less likely to question whether your description is adequate.

0 coins

Thanks everyone for all the advice. Going to try the comprehensive description approach with fixture filing and see if that gets us through. Will also check out Certana.ai to avoid future rejections. Really appreciate the help!

0 coins

Prev1...299300301302303...684Next