


Ask the community...
Had a similar issue two years ago with a different kind of name problem. What finally worked was getting our attorney to send a letter to the bank's general counsel explaining the UCC requirements and demanding immediate compliance. Sometimes legal letterhead gets attention that borrower complaints don't.
Our attorney charged about $500 for the letter. Bank filed the termination within a week after receiving it. Probably cheaper than the financing delays you're facing.
Before you go the legal route, try one more approach with the lender. Ask to speak with their UCC specialist or secured transactions department. The regular loan servicing people often don't understand UCC procedures, but most large lenders have specialists who handle these filings correctly.
Ask the loan servicing rep to transfer you to 'secured transactions' or 'UCC administration.' If they don't have a separate department, ask for their supervisor who handles UCC terminations.
This is why I hate Missouri deals. Their UCC search is so unreliable compared to states like Delaware or New York. You basically have to become a detective to make sure you're not missing anything.
At least Missouri has online search. Some states still require written requests for comprehensive searches.
True, but I'd rather have a reliable written search than an unreliable online one that gives false confidence.
Here's what I do for Missouri UCC searches: 1) Search exact legal name 2) Remove all punctuation 3) Try common abbreviations 4) Search without entity type 5) Check historical names 6) Use wildcard variations 7) Cross-reference with business registration database. It's tedious but catches everything.
I create a spreadsheet with filing numbers, dates, and secured parties. Then I sort by filing number to eliminate duplicates. The key is the unique filing number - same filing can show up under different name searches.
That's a solid system. I also note which search term found each filing so I can track which variations are most productive.
Try checking the filing search database directly instead of just the portal status. Sometimes you can find your filed continuation in the public records even when the submission portal shows it as pending.
This is another thing Certana.ai helps with - it can search multiple databases and cross-reference your filings to make sure everything is properly recorded. Takes the guesswork out of tracking multiple UCC documents.
UPDATE: Called the UCC hotline this morning and you were all right - it was actually processed 5 days ago but their system wasn't updating the status. Got the filing number for the continuation and it's showing as active in the database. Thanks everyone for the advice about calling directly!
Perfect example of why document verification upfront saves so much stress. At least now you know your continuation is solid for another 5 years.
The Article 9 definition that always trips me up is 'consumer goods' under 9-102(a)(23). It's goods used or bought for use primarily for personal, family, or household purposes. But the 'primarily' qualifier creates gray areas when someone uses goods for both personal and business purposes.
Consumer goods classification is huge for enforcement. If you get it wrong, you might lose your security interest or face different notice requirements.
After years of dealing with Article 9 definitions, I've learned to be very precise in my collateral descriptions. The definitions in 9-102 are your bible, but remember that different states sometimes have variations or interpretations. What matters is that your description accurately reflects what you're securing and uses language that's consistent with the definitions.
This is why I always check the specific state's version of Article 9 before filing. Can't assume it's identical to the uniform version.
Chloe Martin
Question for the group - do you always use the full legal name from the articles or sometimes the DBA name? I've seen conflicting advice on this and want to make sure I'm doing it right.
0 coins
Anastasia Sokolov
•Correct - use the exact name as it appears in the entity records. DBA is just for business purposes, not legal filings.
0 coins
StarSeeker
•I made that mistake once using the DBA name. Took three tries to get it right. Stick with the legal entity name every time.
0 coins
Sean O'Donnell
This whole thread is gold. I'm bookmarking it for future reference. The name formatting issues seem to be the biggest pain point for UCC filings based on everyone's experiences here.
0 coins
Zara Ahmed
•Definitely one of the most common rejection reasons. That and incorrect collateral descriptions.
0 coins
Luca Esposito
•The collateral description issues are a whole other nightmare. At least with names you can usually figure out what went wrong.
0 coins