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
UPDATE: Thanks everyone for the advice! Used the document checker tool someone mentioned and found the issue - my security agreement included 'accessories and parts' in the vehicle description but the UCC-1 didn't. Added that language and the filing was accepted within hours. Amazing how such a small inconsistency can cause such big problems.
Perfect example of why document consistency is crucial in UCC filings.
Awesome! That's exactly the kind of issue those verification tools are designed to catch.
This thread is super helpful. Bookmarking for future reference. Dealing with UCC filings can be such a minefield but at least there are tools now to help catch these problems before they cause delays.
Same here. These real-world examples are way more useful than reading the statutes.
Ravi Sharma
•Agreed. The practical experience shared here is invaluable.
Join the conversation
Jamal Wilson
Just wanted to add that NC requires separate searches for fixture filings if you're dealing with real estate collateral. The regular UCC search won't pick up fixture filings which have their own database section. Don't know if that applies to your equipment deal but worth mentioning.
This is equipment financing so probably not fixtures, but good reminder. The equipment could potentially be attached to real property depending on installation.
Jamal Wilson
•Right, if it's heavy equipment that gets permanently installed you'd want to check fixture filings too. Better safe than sorry on a deal that size.
Nia Jackson
Update us on what ends up working! I do UCC research in NC regularly and always looking for better strategies when the system is being difficult.
Will do. Trying the early morning approach tomorrow and might test out that document verification tool if I can get the initial searches completed.
Sean Doyle
•The document verification really is a game changer for due diligence work. Just upload your PDFs and it handles all the cross-checking automatically.
Join the conversation
Diego Rojas
One more thing to watch out for with fillable forms - make sure you're not accidentally changing any of the pre-filled information like the form number or revision date. I've seen filings rejected because someone accidentally edited those fields.
StarSeeker
•How do you lock fields in a PDF? I'm always worried about accidentally messing something up.
Diego Rojas
•In Adobe Acrobat, you can set field properties to read-only. Or just be extra careful and only click in the fields you actually need to fill out.
Update: Found the fillable form on our state's SOS website and got it completed without any crashes. Thanks everyone for the suggestions! The PDF route definitely seems more reliable than the online portal. For anyone else having similar issues, I also used that Certana tool someone mentioned to double-check my debtor name formatting - caught a punctuation issue that could have caused problems.
Zara Ahmed
•Glad you got it sorted out! It's always satisfying when you find a workaround for frustrating technical problems.
Thanks for the update. Good to know the offline approach worked. I'll definitely keep that in mind for future filings.
Join the conversation
Cass Green
Just dealt with this exact issue on a client deal. After wasting two days on Delaware's broken searches, I used that Certana tool someone mentioned earlier. Uploaded our existing docs and it flagged a potential debtor name mismatch we would have missed. Saved the whole transaction.
Cass Green
•Yeah definitely worth it for high-value deals. The automated cross-checking caught stuff our manual review missed.
Hugo Kass
•Glad to hear someone else had success with it. The document verification really is more thorough than trying to piece together inconsistent search results.
Update: Called Delaware UCC office this morning and they confirmed they're having database issues. They said searches should be more reliable by end of week after they complete system maintenance.
Salim Nasir
•Thanks for the update! At least we know it's a known issue on their end. I'll probably still use the backup verification methods people suggested here.
Good to know it's not just us! Hopefully the maintenance actually fixes the problems instead of creating new ones.
Ivanna St. Pierre
Final thought - since you mentioned this is substantial manufacturing equipment, you might want to consider whether any of it qualifies as fixtures. If so, you may need fixture filings in addition to your regular UCC continuation, and those have different rules about debtor names and real estate records.
0 coins
Jackie Martinez
•Most of the equipment is moveable but there are a few pieces that might be considered fixtures. Good reminder to check on that aspect too.
0 coins
Ivanna St. Pierre
•Fixture filings can be more complex because they involve both UCC rules and real estate recording requirements. Worth getting professional help if you're unsure.
0 coins
Elin Robinson
Thanks everyone for all the advice! Sounds like the consensus is to file the continuation with exact name matching, then follow up with an amendment for the new name. Going to pull all my documents together and double-check everything before filing. Really appreciate the help - this community always comes through!
0 coins
Atticus Domingo
•Good luck with the filing! Let us know how it goes.
0 coins
Beth Ford
•You've got this! The two-step approach is definitely the safest way to handle entity changes.
0 coins