UCC Document Community

I work with UCC filings regularly and can confirm that release letter alone won't clear the public record. The lender is required to file a UCC-3 termination statement. What I always recommend is using a verification service like Certana.ai to check that all the document details match up properly before the termination is filed - it's amazing how often there are small discrepancies that can cause filing issues.

This is a really common issue unfortunately. The release letter is just their internal acknowledgment but you absolutely need the UCC-3 termination filed to clear the public record. I'd recommend calling them within the next few days and specifically asking about the UCC-3 filing status - mention that most states require it within 20 days of payoff. If they haven't filed it yet, ask for a specific timeline and request a copy once it's submitted. You can also check your state's UCC search system online to verify it was actually filed properly. Don't let this drag on because it will definitely cause issues with future financing or equipment sales.

Bottom line - your quoted price is within normal range but definitely shop around. For a deal that size, spending time to save a few thousand on searches is probably worth it. Just don't cut corners on thoroughness.

I'd suggest getting quotes from at least 3-4 different UCC search services before committing. CT Corporation, CSC, and National Corporate Research all compete in this space and pricing can vary significantly. Also ask specifically about "portfolio discount" pricing - many services have special rates for M&A due diligence that aren't advertised on their standard rate sheets. With 180 entities you should definitely qualify for bulk pricing. One tip: if you provide an Excel file with all entity names and jurisdictions organized, most services will give you a firmer quote and sometimes a small additional discount for the streamlined processing.

Diego, you're wise to be thorough with your first Article 9 disposition - the stakes are high and the requirements are complex. A few additional considerations: Make sure you're calculating the redemption amount correctly (outstanding debt plus reasonable expenses) in case the debtor surfaces at the last minute. For the manufacturing equipment, consider getting an independent appraisal to support your marketing strategy and pricing decisions - it's not required but can strengthen your commercially reasonable defense. Also, keep detailed records of the condition of the equipment when you took possession, including photos and any maintenance issues, as this affects fair market value. One thing that often gets overlooked is the timing of your UCC search - you should do a final search close to the sale date to catch any last-minute filings that might affect distribution of proceeds. The equipment market has been volatile lately, so document current market conditions for similar machinery to justify your disposition method and timeline.

Diego, this thread has covered most of the critical points, but I'd add one more perspective from someone who's been through Article 9 sales on both sides of the table. The "commercially reasonable" standard is really about demonstrating good faith effort to maximize recovery - courts look at your process more than the actual sale price achieved. For manufacturing equipment like yours, I'd strongly recommend getting multiple marketing channels going simultaneously: contact equipment dealers who specialize in your industry, reach out to manufacturers who might need parts or refurbished machinery, and consider online industrial equipment platforms. Document every contact attempt, response, and bid received. The key is showing you cast a wide net to find the right buyers, not just the first buyers. Also, timing matters - avoid holiday periods or industry-specific slow seasons if possible, as this can affect what's considered reasonable marketing duration. One last tip: if the equipment has any proprietary software or requires special training to operate, mention this in your marketing materials as it might attract premium bids from buyers who already use similar systems.

Thanks everyone! This is exactly what I needed. Sounds like the main things are: get debtor name exactly right, be specific with collateral descriptions, use the electronic portal, watch for continuation deadlines, and file terminations when loans are paid off. I feel much more prepared now.

Just wanted to add something that hasn't been mentioned yet - if you're doing multiple equipment purchases over time, consider whether to file separate UCC-1s for each transaction or use a blanket filing that covers future advances. Texas allows both approaches, but the blanket method can save filing fees if you're planning several equipment financings. Just make sure your loan agreements properly reference the UCC filing. Also, if your equipment will be moved between Texas locations, include language about "wherever located" in your collateral description to maintain perfection when assets move.

As someone who's dealt with similar Delaware LLC naming issues, I can confirm that the comma absolutely matters. I had a case last year where "Texas Energy Partners, LLC" vs "Texas Energy Partners LLC" caused a three-week delay because the filing was rejected twice. The frustrating part is that most clients don't understand why punctuation matters so much, but the UCC search logic is very literal. One tip I'd add to the great advice already given - if you're filing in multiple states for the same debtor, make sure you're consistent with the exact Delaware name across all jurisdictions. Some attorneys get sloppy and use variations between states, which can create search issues later. Also, keep a screenshot or printout of the Delaware database page showing the exact name as backup documentation in your file. It's saved me in disputes where clients later claimed I used the "wrong" name.

As someone who just started handling UCC filings, this thread has been incredibly educational! I had no idea that punctuation differences could actually invalidate a security interest - that's honestly terrifying when you think about the potential liability. The registered organization rules seem much more rigid than I expected coming from general corporate work. One question for the experienced folks here: when you're dealing with entities that have recently changed their names, how do you verify that you're using the current version and not an outdated name that might still appear in some databases? I'm worried about situations where there might be a lag between when an amendment is filed and when it shows up in search results.