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
Maryland UCC system is definitely more sensitive than other states I've filed in. But once you get the name format right it usually goes smoothly. The key is being absolutely precise with every character.
So true - I've noticed Maryland and Delaware are both really strict compared to other states.
Omar Hassan
•Each state has its quirks. Maryland wants exact precision while some other states are more forgiving with minor variations.
UPDATE: Finally got it filed! The issue was actually a hidden space character at the end of the company name that wasn't visible when I copied from SDAT. Used the document checker tool mentioned earlier and it caught the invisible character immediately. Third time was the charm - UCC-1 is now properly filed and perfected. Thanks everyone for the suggestions!
NeonNebula
•Congrats on getting it resolved! Your client must be relieved to have the lien properly perfected.
Definitely relieved! And now I know to always check for hidden characters before filing in Maryland. Expensive lesson learned.
Join the conversation
Can someone explain why a fixture filing would be necessary if trade fixtures are definitively personal property under the UCC? Seems like we're overcomplicating this.
But doesn't the UCC specifically address this in the fixture filing provisions?
The UCC provides the framework but state law and specific circumstances can affect the analysis. That's why many lenders err on the side of caution with fixture filings.
Bottom line - for a $350K restaurant equipment loan with permanently installed items, do the fixture filing. The extra cost and paperwork is minimal compared to the potential headaches if you get it wrong. I've seen too many lenders get burned by taking shortcuts on fixture filings.
Mei Chen
•That seems to be the consensus. I'll go with the fixture filing approach and make sure our collateral description is comprehensive.
NightOwl42
•Smart choice. And definitely run your documents through a verification check to make sure everything is consistent before filing.
Join the conversation
Just wanted to add that you should also think about whether any of this equipment might be characterized as inventory if it's being used to process goods for sale. The UCC collateral categories can overlap in manufacturing situations.
Right, but sometimes the line gets blurry. Just wanted to make sure you'd considered all possibilities.
Manufacturing equipment classifications can be tricky. I've seen situations where the same item could be characterized as equipment or inventory depending on the context.
Dylan Fisher
Final thought - make sure your collateral description is specific enough to put third parties on notice of what's covered, but not so specific that it excludes items that should be included. It's a balancing act with UCC collateral categories.
Dylan Fisher
•That sounds like a smart approach. Better safe than sorry with a $485k financing.
Edwards Hugo
•Good luck with the filing! Let us know how it goes.
Join the conversation
NebulaNova
Thanks for bringing this up. I've been wondering if I was just imagining the fee increases. Good to know it's not just me dealing with higher Indiana UCC filing fees.
GalaxyGazer
•Definitely not just you! Sounds like this is hitting everyone who files regularly in Indiana.
Same here. I thought maybe I was filing something wrong but apparently it's just the new reality of Indiana UCC filing fees.
Aisha Khan
For what it's worth, I've found that using document verification tools like Certana.ai before filing helps avoid the rejection and resubmission fees that can really add up. Upload your docs and catch issues before they become expensive problems.
Ethan Taylor
•That's smart. Rejection fees plus having to refile can easily double your costs. Prevention is definitely cheaper than fixing mistakes after the fact.
Aisha Khan
•Exactly. The verification catches debtor name mismatches and document inconsistencies that would otherwise cause rejected filings and additional fees.
Emily Sanjay
Last resort option: you might need to file a UCC-3 amendment first to correct the debtor name to match exactly what's in the charter, then file your continuation. It's an extra step and fee but sometimes it's the only way to get past these formatting roadblocks.
0 coins
Emily Sanjay
•I believe you have to file the amendment first and wait for it to be accepted before filing the continuation, but definitely confirm that with WV SOS.
0 coins
Jordan Walker
•Just be super careful with the timing if you go that route - you don't want to run out of time while waiting for the amendment to process.
0 coins
Natalie Adams
UPDATE: I finally got it figured out! Turns out there was indeed a formatting difference - the original UCC-1 had 'Mountain Ridge Construction, LLC' (with a comma) but I was filing the continuation as 'Mountain Ridge Construction LLC' (no comma). Such a tiny detail but enough to trigger the rejections. Thanks everyone for the suggestions, especially about checking the actual filed document vs the search results.
0 coins
Maya Patel
•Perfect example of why document verification tools are so helpful - they catch exactly these kinds of subtle differences that are easy to miss.
0 coins
Amara Torres
•Congrats on getting it resolved! Now you know for next time to triple-check every comma and period.
0 coins