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
GalaxyGlider
One more thing to try - if you have Adobe Acrobat Pro, you can use the 'compare documents' feature to look at your original UCC-1 filing and your amendment side by side. It'll highlight any differences even if they're not visible to the naked eye. I've found discrepancies that way before.
Mei Wong
•Don't have Adobe Pro but this is a good idea. Are there any free alternatives that do document comparison?
You can try online PDF comparison tools but they're not always as accurate as Adobe. For something this important I'd probably spring for the real thing.
Amara Okafor
Just wanted to follow up and say I finally got it resolved! It was exactly what several people suggested - there was a comma after 'Solutions' in the original filing that I missed. 'Advanced Construction Solutions, LLC' vs 'Advanced Construction Solutions LLC'. Such a tiny difference but it was causing all the rejections. Used the copy/paste method from the original filing receipt and the amendment went through on the first try. Thanks everyone for the help, this forum is a lifesaver for UCC issues.
Amara Okafor
•Just one business day. Florida is actually pretty fast once you get the filing details correct.
StarStrider
•This whole thread should be pinned somewhere. The name matching issues come up constantly with UCC filings.
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
Val Rossi
Update us when you figure this out! I'm dealing with a similar situation and curious how you resolve the name variation issue.
Rajan Walker
•Will do. Probably going to try the automated verification approach first since it seems like the most efficient way to catch anything I missed.
Eve Freeman
•Smart move. Manual checking is too error-prone when you're dealing with multiple name variations.
Just a thought - have you contacted the secured parties listed on those filings? Sometimes they can provide clarity on whether the filings are actually for the same debtor and what the current status is.
Plus it might give you insight into the borrower's payment history and relationship with other lenders.
Harmony Love
•True, but some lenders won't share that information due to confidentiality concerns.
Join the conversation
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.
Will do! Sounds like calling the SOS directly and using document verification tools are my best next steps.
Daryl Bright
•Document verification definitely seems like the way to go based on what people are saying here.
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!
Great to hear Certana.ai helped catch that! Those tiny punctuation differences are exactly what manual review misses.
Thanks for the update. Filing this away for future reference when I inevitably run into the same thing.
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.
0 coins
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.
0 coins
Sebastian Scott
•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.
0 coins
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.
0 coins
Jordan Walker
•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.
0 coins
Natalie Adams
•Quarterly reviews minimum, monthly if you can manage it. The UCC system rewards paranoia unfortunately.
0 coins