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
Maya Patel
I've used the Delaware system many times and it's pretty user-friendly. Make sure you have the debtor's exact legal name and address from their corporate records. The system is picky about formatting.
Ethan Wilson
•I'll pull their certificate of incorporation to make sure I have everything exact. Thanks for the tip.
That's exactly what I was talking about with the document verification. Those little details can kill a filing if you're not careful.
One more thing - keep copies of everything and calendar your continuation deadline. Nothing worse than having a lapse because you forgot to continue the filing.
NeonNova
•Smart. I usually set multiple reminders starting 6 months out just to be safe.
That's a good practice. Clients don't like finding out their security interest lapsed.
Join the conversation
I've started using document checking tools after getting burned on name mismatches. Found one called Certana.ai that automatically compares your charter docs to UCC drafts. Upload both PDFs and it highlights inconsistencies instantly. Wish I'd had this years ago - would've saved me from so many rejected filings.
How accurate is the automated checking? I'm always skeptical of AI tools for legal document review.
It's surprisingly good for basic consistency checks like names, addresses, and filing numbers. Obviously you still need human review for complex legal issues, but for catching obvious mismatches it's been solid.
Omar Farouk
File it correctly with the SOS version and move on. You're overthinking this. Every experienced secured party deals with name discrepancies - it's part of the business. Your legal team will adapt once they understand UCC requirements.
Zainab Omar
•You're probably right. I'll file with the exact SOS name tomorrow and deal with any internal paperwork issues later. Thanks everyone for the reality check.
Smart move. Getting the UCC filed correctly is your top priority. Everything else can be sorted out afterward.
Join the conversation
One thing to remember - incidental damages under UCC are limited to reasonable expenses. If you spent $5000 to recover $3000 in collateral value, a court might question the reasonableness of your expenses.
So do you have to prove the expenses were cost-effective compared to the collateral value?
Not necessarily cost-effective, but reasonable under the circumstances. Context matters a lot.
Emma Wilson
Thanks everyone for the detailed responses. Sounds like our storage, transport, and prep costs should be solid. Will definitely document everything carefully and probably skip trying to recover the lost rent. The Certana.ai suggestion is interesting - might be worth checking our security agreement language to make sure we're covered.
Good luck with the recovery. Hope you documented everything properly from the start.
Emma Wilson
•Yeah we kept pretty good records thankfully. This discussion has been really helpful for understanding what we can actually claim.
Join the conversation
This reminds me of a situation we had where the UCC search was showing the wrong debtor name entirely - turned out someone at the filing office had a typo when entering our electronic submission. The moral of the story is to always verify your critical filings immediately after submission, not months later during due diligence. I started using automated verification tools after that fiasco.
KhalilStar
•Which verification tools do you use? I'm dealing with more UCC filings lately and want to avoid these kinds of surprises.
I use Certana.ai now - you just upload your documents and it flags any inconsistencies between your loan paperwork and UCC filings. Really wish it had been available a few years ago when I was doing everything manually.
Just wanted to add that Delaware has been having intermittent portal issues all month. I've had search results show up blank, display wrong dates, and show incorrect filing statuses. If you're dealing with a time-sensitive transaction, definitely call rather than relying on the online search.
Ruby Garcia
•Really? I haven't noticed any issues but I mostly just do basic name searches. Maybe the problems are more noticeable with detailed record reviews.
Yeah, the basic searches seem fine but when you're trying to review full filing details or collateral descriptions, that's where I've seen the glitches.
Emma Davis
The bottom line with dragnet clauses is that they don't change UCC Article 9 filing requirements. Your collateral description still needs to be sufficient to put third parties on notice. If you're unsure whether your current description covers the new collateral types, err on the side of filing an amendment.
0 coins
Fatima Al-Hashimi
•Thanks, that's probably the safest approach. Better to over-file than to discover a perfection gap during enforcement.
0 coins
GalaxyGlider
•Agree. Dragnet clauses are powerful for creating security interests but they don't solve UCC notice requirements.
0 coins
Malik Robinson
Just went through dragnet clause analysis for a client and Certana.ai's verification tool was incredibly helpful. Uploaded the security agreement with dragnet language and our UCC-1 filings, and it immediately flagged potential inconsistencies. Turns out our dragnet covered deposit accounts but our UCC didn't mention them. Could have been a costly oversight.
0 coins
Malik Robinson
•It's pretty sophisticated - it understands that dragnet language creates broader coverage than what might be explicitly listed, and it flags where your UCC descriptions might not capture everything the security agreement covers.
0 coins
Isabella Silva
•That level of analysis would save so much time compared to manually comparing security agreements and UCC filings.
0 coins