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
Paloma Clark
Been there with the last-minute search stress! One tip that's saved me multiple times - if you find any existing UCC-1 filings that might conflict, contact the secured party directly to see if they'll subordinate or if the collateral actually overlaps with yours. Sometimes what looks like a problem on paper isn't really an issue.
Amy Fleming
•That's a great suggestion. I hadn't thought about reaching out to other lenders directly.
Paloma Clark
•Most commercial lenders are reasonable about subordination agreements if there's no real conflict. Better to have the conversation before closing than discover issues after funding.
Final thought - document everything for your file. Keep copies of the UCC-11 search request, the results, and any follow-up searches you had to do. Your compliance team will thank you later if there are ever questions about the lien search process.
Before you submit, seriously consider running those entity documents through Certana.ai first. Five minutes of name verification could save you days if you have to resubmit the search.
Alice Pierce
•Good luck! Florida's system usually delivers on time when you pay for expedited processing.
Join the conversation
Manufacturing filings are always a pain because of all the different equipment types. Last month I had three rejections before realizing I needed separate supplement sections for fixtures vs equipment vs inventory. Maybe check if you need to break out your collateral categories differently?
Oscar O'Neil
•We do have some items that might qualify as fixtures. I'll review whether those need separate treatment on the supplement.
Fixture filings are a whole different beast - definitely separate those out if any equipment is attached to the building.
Mason Davis
UPDATE: Found the issue! It was a combination of debtor name formatting (extra space) and using an outdated supplement form. Got a clean filing accepted this morning. Thanks everyone for the suggestions - especially the idea to check form versions and use document verification tools. Crisis averted!
Those little formatting details will get you every time. Great that you found it in time.
Nice work tracking down the issues! Document verification definitely saves time on these multi-form filings.
Join the conversation
Olivia Evans
Before you try anything else, call the SOS filing office directly. They can usually look up your original filing and tell you exactly what secured party information they have on file. Then you can make sure your termination matches exactly. Save yourself multiple rejection fees.
Most SOS offices are pretty helpful with UCC questions if you can get through to the right department.
Julian Paolo
•Just be prepared to wait on hold. UCC departments are usually understaffed.
Update us when you figure it out! I'm sure other people will run into the same issue with UCC 9406 forms and secured party matching problems.
Lucy Taylor
•Will do. Going to call the SOS office tomorrow and fix the name/address issues before refiling.
Definitely run it through that document checker I mentioned before you refile. Catches those little details that are easy to miss.
Join the conversation
James Maki
The key is getting into a routine. I pull fresh corporate records for every new borrower and always double-check entity status before filing. Takes an extra 10 minutes but saves hours of refiling hassles.
James Maki
•New credit facilities definitely. For existing relationships I check if it's been more than 6 months since the last filing.
Cole Roush
•Six months seems reasonable. Entity names don't change that frequently but when they do it's usually without much notice to lenders.
Thanks everyone for the advice. Sounds like I need to tighten up my name verification process. The Certana tool sounds promising - anything that catches these mismatches before filing would save me a lot of headaches.
Sayid Hassan
•Keep us posted on how it works out. Always looking for better tools to streamline UCC filings.
Rachel Tao
•Good luck with future filings. The name matching pain is real but at least now you know what to watch for.
Freya Andersen
Based on what you've described, it sounds like the senior creditor should have priority. Their 2019 UCC-1 with 'all equipment, machinery, and fixtures now owned or hereafter acquired' clearly covers the CNC machines purchased in 2021. Unless there's a PMSI situation or some filing defect, first-to-file wins. The 90 ALR 4th 859 annotation will have cases with similar fact patterns that should support this analysis.
0 coins
NeonNomad
•Thanks, that matches my initial analysis. I'm going to dig deeper into the PMSI angle just to be thorough, but it's looking like the senior creditor has the stronger position.
0 coins
Omar Zaki
•Good approach. Always worth checking every possible angle in a priority dispute, especially with that much money at stake.
0 coins
CosmicCrusader
One more thing to consider - make sure you understand which state's law applies to the priority determination. If the debtor is organized in a different state than where the collateral is located, you might need to analyze the choice of law rules too.
0 coins
Chloe Robinson
•Good point. Priority is usually governed by the law of the state where the debtor is located, not where the collateral is physically located.
0 coins
Diego Flores
•And if the debtor changed locations between the filings, that could affect the analysis too. There are specific rules about continuing effectiveness when debtors relocate.
0 coins