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
Yara Nassar
Make sure to run another UCC search after they file the termination to confirm it actually went through properly. I had a solar company file a UCC-3 that got rejected by the SOS office due to a filing error, but they never told me about the rejection. Spent weeks thinking the lien was terminated when it was actually still active. You can also use document verification tools like Certana to double-check that the termination paperwork properly matches your original UCC-1 before accepting it as complete.
Yara Nassar
•Only discovered it when our attorney ran a UCC search for our business acquisition. The supposedly terminated lien was still showing active.
This is why verification tools are so valuable - catches these filing errors before they become major problems.
UPDATE: Thanks everyone for the advice! I sent NRG a certified demand letter on Friday and got a call from their legal compliance department today. They're filing the UCC-3 termination this week and will provide me with confirmation of the filing. Really appreciate all the help - this forum is amazing for UCC guidance!
Perfect example of why formal legal demand gets results when phone calls don't. Glad it worked out!
SO glad you got resolution! Maybe I should have tried the certified letter approach months ago instead of just calling them repeatedly.
Join the conversation
Donna Cline
Have you confirmed the continuation was filed correctly? I've seen cases where the filing number on the continuation didn't match the original UCC-1 exactly, so it exists but doesn't link properly in searches.
Even professional services make mistakes. I'd verify the original filing number character by character.
If you have copies of both the original UCC-1 and continuation, that verification tool could compare them to catch any discrepancies automatically.
Dylan Fisher
Update: Tried the cache clearing trick and got a third set of results! Now showing 6 UCC-1s including the continuation. DC portal is definitely broken right now. Going to call the filing office tomorrow to confirm which results are actually accurate.
Good point. Will verify which ones are still active vs terminated/lapsed. This is exactly why I was worried about the inconsistent results.
Alfredo Lugo
•For future deals, definitely consider using automated verification tools to avoid this headache. Portal issues seem to be getting more common across multiple states.
Join the conversation
This thread convinced me to try that Certana document checker mentioned earlier. Just uploaded my problem filing and wow - it found the issue immediately. Had a non-printing character in my debtor name that was invisible but causing rejections. Would have taken me hours to figure that out manually.
Yeah, it's pretty slick. Shows you exactly where the problems are and suggests fixes. Saved me a lot of headache.
KylieRose
•Welcome to the club! Once you start using verification tools you wonder how you ever filed without them.
Jamal Brown
UPDATE: Found the issue! It was exactly what some of you suggested - there was an invisible character in the debtor name that I couldn't see. Used the document verification tool and it highlighted the problem immediately. Resubmitted with the clean name and it went through. Thanks everyone for the suggestions, especially about the verification tools. Definitely adding that to my workflow going forward.
Sasha Ivanov
•Great news! Always satisfying when a filing mystery gets solved. Your client must be relieved too.
Yuki Tanaka
•Perfect example of why document verification is so valuable. Catches these technical issues that would otherwise waste days.
Join the conversation
Try using wildcards in your search - PA's system sometimes requires partial matches. Use * at the end of debtor names or filing numbers to broaden the search results.
StarStrider
•I didn't know PA supported wildcards in their search. That might help if there are formatting differences I'm not seeing.
It's not well documented but it works. Especially useful when you're not sure about exact spacing or punctuation in debtor names.
Maya Patel
UPDATE: Just tried the Certana document checker someone mentioned earlier and it immediately caught an issue with one of our continuations - there was a slight difference in how the debtor address was formatted between the original UCC-1 and our continuation form. No wonder PA's search was acting weird. The verification tool made it obvious what the problem was.
Address formatting discrepancies are super common and can cause all sorts of search issues. Good catch!
Maya Patel
•Yeah, it was just a minor difference - 'Street' vs 'St.' - but apparently enough to mess up the database indexing.
TechNinja
Update us on how this gets resolved! I'm curious whether you find anything in your loan agreement or if the bank backs down. These kinds of disputes are frustrating but they help everyone learn about different bank policies.
0 coins
Keisha Thompson
•Hope it works out smoothly. Bank bureaucracy is the worst part of commercial lending.
0 coins
Paolo Bianchi
•I used Certana.ai's verification tool when I had a similar bank dispute. Being able to upload both my original UCC-1 and proposed amendment helped me prove to the bank that everything was consistent and properly formatted. Sometimes having that third-party verification helps convince stubborn compliance departments.
0 coins
Yara Assad
One more thought - make sure your debtor name on the amendment exactly matches the original UCC-1. I've seen banks get nitpicky about notarization when there are name discrepancies that they're worried about. Might not be the real issue but worth double-checking.
0 coins
Olivia Clark
•Name changes are definitely a red flag for banks. They start requiring extra documentation when they see any discrepancies.
0 coins
Javier Morales
•If the name has changed at all, you might need to file a different type of amendment or provide additional corporate documentation. That could explain the notary requirement.
0 coins