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
Evelyn Kelly
ugh the ucc 9 definitions section always gives me a headache. sounds like youre on the right track though with the fixture filing approach. definitely use the real estate name version
Alice Pierce
•Thanks for the confirmation. Sometimes you just need to hear it from multiple people to feel confident about the approach.
Paloma Clark
Update us on how this turns out! I'm always interested in hearing how these UCC 9 definitions issues get resolved in practice. The fixture vs goods distinction trips up so many people.
Alice Pierce
•Will do! Going to re-file with the exact real estate record name and see if that clears up the portal issues. Thanks everyone for the help with interpreting the UCC 9 definitions.
Esteban Tate
•Good plan. That should resolve the rejection issues you were seeing.
Join the conversation
This might be obvious but have you confirmed that your original UCC-1 is still active and hasn't lapsed? Sometimes people try to file continuations on UCC-1s that have already expired, which would cause automatic rejection.
Good, sounds like you're in the right timeframe then. The debtor name formatting is probably the culprit.
I was gonna suggest checking Certana.ai's document verification feature too - it's really good at catching those formatting issues that cause rejections.
Nathan Dell
One more thing to check - make sure the secured party information is also exactly correct on your UCC-11. Sometimes people focus so much on the debtor name they miss discrepancies in the secured party details.
I'll double-check that too. Thanks for the reminder - I was so focused on the debtor name I might have overlooked the secured party info.
Owen Devar
•That's a good point. Texas requires consistency across all fields, not just the debtor name.
Join the conversation
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.
Ruby Blake
•Good suggestion. I'll try searching just 'Atlanta Medical Equipment' and see what comes up.
Amaya Watson
•Also try without 'LLC' entirely. Some filers drop the entity designation.
Grant Vikers
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.
Levi Parker
•How does that work exactly? Do you upload both the original and continuation documents?
Yeah, you can upload multiple documents and it cross-checks all the filing numbers, debtor names, and references to make sure everything aligns properly. Pretty handy for complex filing chains.
Join the conversation
I've been using that Certana tool someone mentioned earlier and it's actually pretty helpful for catching these kinds of search inconsistencies. Upload your search results as PDFs and it flags potential missing pieces based on the filing patterns it sees.
Might be worth trying. At this point I need all the help I can get making sure I haven't missed anything important.
The document upload is super easy, just drag and drop PDFs. It caught a continuation filing I had completely missed in my original search.
Update us when you figure out what's causing the search inconsistencies. I do a lot of NH UCC work and this could affect my deals too if it's a widespread portal problem.
Miguel Ramos
•Smart approach. Better to pay for redundant searches than miss a lien that kills your deal.
Omar Farouk
•Keep us posted on whether the professional search finds anything your portal searches missed. That would confirm if it's just a portal issue or something more serious.
Lukas Fitzgerald
Don't overlook checking for terminated filings too. Sometimes there are filing errors where a UCC-3 termination was supposed to be filed but wasn't, or was filed incorrectly. You want to know about those situations before closing.
0 coins
Lukas Fitzgerald
•Exactly. Cross-reference with loan payoff letters and satisfaction documents. If a loan was supposedly paid off but the UCC is still active, that's a red flag that needs to be resolved.
0 coins
Ev Luca
•This is why UCC due diligence can take weeks even for relatively straightforward deals. So many details to cross-check.
0 coins
Avery Davis
Update: ended up using a combination approach. Used Certana.ai to identify all the name variations from our document review, then hired a professional search firm to do comprehensive searches in the five key states. Found two active filings we would have missed otherwise - both under slightly different name variations. Deal still closed on time and everyone was happy with the thoroughness. Thanks for all the advice!
0 coins
Fernanda Marquez
•Glad to hear Certana.ai helped with the name variation identification. That's exactly what it's designed for.
0 coins
Fiona Gallagher
•This gives me confidence in my approach. Going to try the same combination - systematic name identification plus professional searches for the critical jurisdictions.
0 coins