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
Document everything about these rejections. If you end up with a perfection gap due to SOS processing issues, you'll want a complete record showing your good faith efforts to maintain continuous perfection. This documentation could be crucial if there are ever disputes about the security interest priority.
Also keep copies of all the different versions you tried to file. Shows you were actively working to correct any issues.
Your legal team will thank you for this documentation if issues arise later. Due diligence in filing efforts matters.
Update us on what works! I have two UCC-103 continuations coming up next month and want to avoid this same nightmare. Really hoping the SOS systems get more user-friendly soon, but I'm not holding my breath.
Kyle Wallace
•The learning curve on UCC-103 filings is steep. Every state seems to have different quirks and requirements.
Cedric Chung
•Will definitely update once we get this resolved. Thanks everyone for the suggestions - trying the document verification approach first.
Join the conversation
Kaiya Rivera
We started requiring our borrowers to pull their own certificate of good standing within 30 days of closing specifically because of these Title 9 name matching issues. Costs them about $25-50 depending on the state but it gives us the most current legal name directly from the secretary of state. Has eliminated probably 80% of our name-related rejections.
Noah Irving
•Do you make them get it from their state of incorporation or the state where they're doing business? We have borrowers registered in Delaware but operating in our state.
Kaiya Rivera
•State of incorporation for the legal name, but we also check if they're qualified to do business in our state since that can affect the debtor name requirements for UCC filing location.
Thanks everyone for all the advice. Sounds like this is just the new reality with Title 9 compliance and we need to tighten up our processes. Going to implement some of these suggestions including the automated verification tools. The cost of getting it wrong is just too high when you're talking about secured transactions and perfected liens.
Madison King
•Good luck with the process improvements. The learning curve is steep but once you get the workflow down it becomes routine. Just remember that Title 9 doesn't give you much margin for error on debtor names.
Julian Paolo
•Keep us posted on how the changes work out. Always interested to hear what solutions are working for other lenders dealing with these same Title 9 compliance challenges.
Join the conversation
Sergio Neal
Update us when you figure out what was causing the rejection! I'm dealing with a potential Oregon UCC issue myself and want to know what to watch out for.
Will definitely post an update once I get it resolved. Hopefully it's something simple like the address formatting that others mentioned.
Yes please update! These kinds of real-world examples are super helpful for learning what to avoid.
Juan Moreno
Consider reaching out to the original lender's legal department if you continue having issues. They should be familiar with Oregon's requirements and might be able to provide a corrected termination form that will process successfully.
Amy Fleming
•Banks definitely should know how to do this properly since they file UCC documents constantly. If they gave you a defective termination form that's really their problem to fix.
Alice Pierce
•Exactly. The secured party is responsible for providing accurate termination documents. Don't let them put this back on you to figure out.
Join the conversation
For what it's worth the rejection notices from Alabama are usually pretty specific about what doesn't match. Look closely at the exact wording they use in the rejection vs what you filed. Sometimes it's obvious, sometimes you have to squint at punctuation marks.
That's typical for AL unfortunately. Some states give you the exact correction needed, Alabama just tells you it's wrong.
Try calling them with your rejection notice number. Sometimes they can look up what specifically didn't match.
Zara Ahmed
Update: Finally got this resolved! Turns out there was an invisible character in the business name that was copying over from our loan system. Used a document verification tool that flagged the hidden character and cleaned up the formatting. Third time was the charm - filing accepted this morning. Thanks everyone for the suggestions!
Great outcome! Which verification service did you end up using?
Zara Ahmed
•Used Certana.ai - just uploaded the PDFs and it spotted the formatting issue immediately. Wish I'd tried it after the first rejection instead of wasting time with manual comparisons.
Miguel Herrera
Just went through something similar but used one of those document verification tools someone mentioned earlier. Certana.ai I think? Anyway, uploaded my security agreement and draft UCC-1 and it immediately flagged that I had the wrong entity type listed. Would have been another rejected filing. The cross-check feature is pretty handy for these complex debtor name situations.
0 coins
Zainab Ali
•How much does something like that cost? Seems like it could save a lot of filing fees and time.
0 coins
Miguel Herrera
•Haven't looked at pricing but definitely cheaper than multiple rejected filings and the stress of missing perfection deadlines. The time savings alone made it worth it.
0 coins
Connor Murphy
Document the exact steps you took for each rejected filing. Include the debtor name format you used, the collateral description, and the rejection reason. That pattern might help identify what's causing the rejections. Sometimes it's not just the debtor name - could be issues with the collateral description or other fields.
0 coins
Connor Murphy
•There you go. The collateral description needs to make sense in the context of US law and your security agreement. References to Canadian documentation might be confusing the filing system.
0 coins
Yara Nassar
•Exactly! Keep the collateral description generic enough to cover the equipment but specific enough to identify it. Don't reference foreign documents in the UCC-1 itself.
0 coins