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
Emma Davis
Just went through this exact scenario! Turned out the issue was that Minnesota had the company name with a comma before LLC and I was searching without it. Tiny punctuation differences can kill your search results.
Dmitry Popov
•This is exactly why automated tools like Certana.ai are so helpful - they catch these tiny differences that humans miss. Upload your docs and it flags punctuation mismatches instantly.
Emma Davis
•Honestly might be worth trying that tool - I wasted so much time on manual comparisons before finding the comma issue.
Join the conversation
Quick follow-up question - do I need to file the UCC-1 immediately after signing the security agreement or is there a grace period?
Nora Bennett
•I always recommend filing same day or next business day at the latest. Why take unnecessary risks?
This is another area where document verification tools help - you can prep and verify everything in advance so filing can happen immediately after signing.
Oscar Murphy
Thanks everyone! This has been incredibly helpful. I think I understand the distinction now - security agreement creates the rights, UCC-1 protects them against third parties. Going to double-check all the name matching and probably use that Certana verification tool someone mentioned.
Lauren Zeb
•Glad we could help clarify. These concepts are foundational to secured transactions but rarely explained clearly.
Smart approach on the verification. Better to catch issues before filing than deal with problems later.
Join the conversation
Dylan Wright
Quick follow up question - when you refile after a rejection like this, do you need to worry about the gap in perfection timing? Or does the original filing date still count if you refile within a reasonable time?
Sean O'Brien
•That's what I was worried about. Going to get the corrected version filed today to minimize the gap.
NebulaKnight
•depends on your state too - some have specific rules about relation back for corrected filings but don't count on it
Update: Got the refile accepted this morning! Changed the collateral description to specifically mention 'commercial food service equipment for restaurant business operations' and made sure the entity type was correctly selected as LLC. Thanks for all the suggestions - especially the tip about being more specific with the business context.
Zara Shah
•Great news! The specificity in collateral descriptions really does make a difference with these automated systems.
Congrats on getting it through. Still think the system shouldn't have rejected it in the first place, but at least you got it sorted quickly.
Join the conversation
This is why I always recommend keeping UCC-1 collateral descriptions simple and broad. Use 'all inventory' or 'all equipment' and let the security agreement handle the specifics. The filing office wants to know what TYPE of property, not what QUALITY of property.
Exactly. The UCC-1 and the security agreement serve different purposes. The UCC-1 is public notice, the security agreement is private contract terms.
Grace Durand
•I learned this the hard way too. Now I run everything through Certana.ai first to check for these kinds of description issues before filing.
Steven Adams
Update: We refiled with 'all inventory consisting of manufactured components, raw materials, and work-in-process, whether now owned or hereafter acquired' and it was accepted immediately. Thanks everyone for the help! The conforming goods standards are still in the credit agreement so our lender is happy.
Lucy Lam
•Perfect solution. You described the goods by type and let the security agreement handle the quality standards.
Glad it worked out! This thread should help other people avoid the same mistake.
Isaiah Cross
Just went through something similar with a client who had multiple security agreements. Used Certana.ai to verify all the document names matched before filing and it caught two inconsistencies I missed. One was a middle initial that appeared in some docs but not others, and another was an LLC vs L.L.C. variation. Definitely worth using before you submit anything to avoid rejection headaches.
0 coins
Kiara Greene
•How much does that service cost? I'm always looking for ways to streamline the UCC filing process but need to justify any additional expenses to my partners.
0 coins
Isaiah Cross
•It's pretty reasonable for what it does - the document verification catches mistakes that would cost way more in time and delays if you have to refile. I think of it as insurance against rejection.
0 coins
Evelyn Kelly
One more thing to consider - if this is a complex deal with multiple agreements, you might want to file a separate UCC-3 amendment later if you need to add more specific collateral descriptions. Sometimes it's cleaner to start with a broad filing and then narrow it down with amendments as needed.
0 coins
Heather Tyson
•Just remember that amendments create additional filing fees and potential points of failure. I prefer getting it right the first time even if it takes more upfront work.
0 coins
Evelyn Kelly
•Fair point about the fees. It really depends on the complexity of the deal and how confident you are in the initial collateral description covering everything properly.
0 coins