


Ask the community...
This thread convinced me to double-check all our UCC filings. Found two that expire next year that I had wrong dates for. Decided to try that Certana.ai tool mentioned earlier and holy cow - uploaded our UCC documents and it instantly caught three potential debtor name mismatches I never noticed. Already fixed two continuation deadlines I had calculated wrong.
Yeah it cross-checks everything - debtor names against articles of incorporation, collateral descriptions, filing numbers. Really thorough compared to doing it manually.
Might have to check that out myself. These manual reviews are killing me and clearly I'm missing stuff.
Bottom line - file your new UCC-1 today, not tomorrow. Every day you wait increases the risk that another creditor could file and take priority over you. Then work with your attorney and lender to minimize any fallout from the lapse. Most importantly, put systems in place so this never happens again.
Smart move. And honestly the fact that you caught it only 3 days late shows you're at least paying attention. I've seen lapses go unnoticed for months.
True, 3 days is manageable. The real disasters happen when people don't realize for weeks or months that their security interests have lapsed.
Quick follow-up question - do I need to file the UCC-1 immediately after signing the security agreement or is there a grace period?
I always recommend filing same day or next business day at the latest. Why take unnecessary risks?
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.
Glad we could help clarify. These concepts are foundational to secured transactions but rarely explained clearly.
One thing that might help - try searching with just the first few words of the business name. Sometimes the database truncates longer names or has character limits that cause exact matches to fail.
Good suggestion. I'll try searching just 'Atlanta Medical Equipment' and see what comes up.
Also try without 'LLC' entirely. Some filers drop the entity designation.
Just to add another perspective - make sure you're checking the actual UCC-3 continuation statements to see if they reference the original filing numbers correctly. I've seen cases where the continuation was filed but didn't properly reference the original UCC-1, making it ineffective.
How does that work exactly? Do you upload both the original and continuation documents?
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?
That's what I was worried about. Going to get the corrected version filed today to minimize the gap.
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.
Great news! The specificity in collateral descriptions really does make a difference with these automated systems.
Connor Richards
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.
0 coins
Connor Richards
•Exactly. The UCC-1 and the security agreement serve different purposes. The UCC-1 is public notice, the security agreement is private contract terms.
0 coins
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.
0 coins
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.
0 coins
Lucy Lam
•Perfect solution. You described the goods by type and let the security agreement handle the quality standards.
0 coins
Alexis Renard
•Glad it worked out! This thread should help other people avoid the same mistake.
0 coins