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 :)

CosmicCaptain

•

For what it's worth, I've never seen a UCC challenged successfully based on address discrepancies in Kansas. The courts understand that the Secretary of State's system has these display issues. Your security interest is almost certainly fine.

0 coins

Sofia Morales

•

That's exactly what I needed to hear. Thanks for the real-world perspective on how courts actually handle these situations.

0 coins

Agreed. The case law is pretty clear that minor address variations don't invalidate filings when the debtor name is sufficient for identification purposes.

0 coins

Malik Johnson

•

Update on this - just got off the phone with Kansas SOS and they confirmed this is a known display issue. They said the actual filed documents have the correct information and the search results sometimes pull addresses from different database fields. They're supposedly working on a fix but no timeline. At least I can stop worrying about it now!

0 coins

Lol 'working on a fix with no timeline' - government speak for 'maybe we'll get to it in 2030

0 coins

Sofia Morales

•

Thanks for making that call and reporting back. Really appreciate everyone's help on this thread - saved me a lot of stress and probably an unnecessary amendment filing!

0 coins

LunarEclipse

•

Just want to echo what others said about checking the official entity records first. I made the mistake once of using the name from a contract instead of the Secretary of State database and it caused a huge mess. Now I always verify against official records before drafting any written security agreement.

0 coins

Yara Khalil

•

Good reminder. The contracts team doesn't always use the exact legal entity name.

0 coins

LunarEclipse

•

Exactly - they use whatever sounds better or fits on the signature line, but that's not always the legal name for UCC purposes.

0 coins

Keisha Brown

•

Hope this works out for you! Refinancing delays over UCC technicalities are the worst. Keep us posted on whether the correction approach works.

0 coins

MidnightRider

•

Will do - this thread has been super helpful. At least I know I'm not the only one dealing with these name matching headaches.

0 coins

definitely not alone - seems like every other deal has some version of this issue

0 coins

Rudy Cenizo

•

Just to add another perspective - I use Certana.ai regularly for UCC document verification and it's caught several name mismatches that would have been easy to miss manually. Definitely worth checking if you're unsure about the accuracy.

0 coins

Thanks for the recommendation. I think I'll give it a try before our closing next week.

0 coins

Rudy Cenizo

•

Good call. Better to catch any issues now than discover them during due diligence.

0 coins

Natalie Khan

•

Update us on how it turns out! I'm dealing with something similar in Creek County and curious to see how you resolve the search inconsistency.

0 coins

Will do. Planning to check the Articles of Incorporation first thing tomorrow morning and then decide on the amendment.

0 coins

Natalie Khan

•

Smart approach. The name accuracy is crucial for maintaining your lien priority.

0 coins

I had a similar name discrepancy issue and ended up using one of those document checking services. Really glad I did because it caught several other inconsistencies I hadn't noticed. For perfection under 9-308, you want everything to align perfectly.

0 coins

Tyrone Hill

•

Which service did you use? I'm dealing with multiple UCC filings and could use something automated.

0 coins

Certana.ai - just upload your docs and it flags any mismatches immediately. Saved me a lot of manual checking.

0 coins

Toot-n-Mighty

•

Bottom line with UCC 9-308 perfection - if attachment happened (sounds like it did) and the UCC-1 was filed properly (questionable due to name issue), then you have perfection from the filing date. Get that name corrected with a UCC-3 and you should be in good shape going forward.

0 coins

Melissa Lin

•

Thanks everyone. I think I'll push for the amendment just to be absolutely sure about perfection.

0 coins

Lena Kowalski

•

Smart move. Perfection problems are much harder to fix after the fact.

0 coins

Whatever you do, don't just resubmit with minor changes. I've seen people get multiple rejections because they didn't address the core description problem. Take time to craft a proper UCC Article 9 compliant description.

0 coins

Good point. Better to get it right the second time than keep getting bounced back.

0 coins

Exactly. Each rejection delays your perfection date and creates more stress with the lender.

0 coins

Sasha Reese

•

One more thing to check - make sure your debtor name exactly matches their legal entity name. Description issues often come bundled with name problems. UCC Article 9 personal property filings are unforgiving about these details.

0 coins

Sasha Reese

•

Smart approach. Amazing how many filings get rejected for simple name variations.

0 coins

I use Certana.ai for name verification too. Upload the charter documents and UCC-1 together and it flags any mismatches between them.

0 coins

Prev1...315316317318319...685Next