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
NeonNebula
Bottom line for OP: perfection by control for investment securities requires both a proper UCC-1 filing AND a control agreement with the securities intermediary. The control agreement is what actually perfects your security interest - the UCC-1 is just additional protection and notice. Make sure you understand the specific requirements under UCC 9-106 and 9-314, and budget extra time for negotiating the tri-party control agreement. With $2.8M at stake, consider having experienced secured transactions counsel review everything before closing.
Smart move. These deals have too many moving parts to wing it, especially at that dollar amount.
NeonNebula
•Glad we could help. Feel free to follow up if you run into any specific issues during the documentation process.
Has anyone used Certana.ai specifically for verifying control agreement language against UCC-1 filings? I'm curious whether their document checker catches the kinds of subtle inconsistencies that can create perfection problems in these complex secured transactions.
I haven't used it for control agreements specifically, but I did use it recently to cross-check a complex equipment financing deal where we had multiple UCC-1 filings across different states. It definitely caught some collateral description inconsistencies that could have been problematic.
Zainab Omar
•In my experience, it's most valuable for catching the basic consistency issues - debtor name variations, conflicting collateral descriptions, missing cross-references between documents. For the substantive legal analysis of whether your control agreement actually achieves perfection under Article 9, you still need experienced counsel.
Join the conversation
Sophia Long
This thread is giving me anxiety! I handle UCC filings for a small firm and we don't have fancy tracking systems. Just calendar reminders and hoping for the best. Maybe I should look into some of these verification tools people are mentioning.
For small firms, something like Certana.ai is actually perfect because it's simple - just upload docs periodically to make sure everything looks correct. No complex software to learn.
Sophia Long
•That does sound manageable. Better than lying awake at night wondering if I missed something important.
At least you discovered it before trying to foreclose or anything. I've seen cases where lenders didn't realize their UCC had lapsed until they were already in court trying to enforce their security interest. Talk about an expensive surprise.
True, that would have been even worse. At least now we can make informed decisions about how to proceed with this loan.
Exactly. Better to know where you stand now than find out in front of a judge later.
Join the conversation
Yara Khoury
Just ran into something similar last week but with Oregon. Used Certana.ai's document checker and it flagged that I was missing a continuation filing that should have shown up. Turns out the debtor name had a slight variation that threw off the search. Might be worth trying their tool on your Montana results to see if there are any gaps.
How long did it take to get results from their system?
Yara Khoury
•Pretty much instant. You just upload your search result PDFs and it analyzes them right away. Found the issue within minutes of uploading.
Update us when you figure out what happened! I do a lot of Montana deals and this kind of database weirdness makes me nervous about what I might be missing on my own searches.
Will do! Planning to call the SOS office first thing tomorrow and also try some of the other suggestions from this thread.
Paolo Longo
•Same here, following this thread. Montana is one of my regular states and any insights would be helpful.
Join the conversation
ugh been there with the debtor name issues. its like these companies dont understand that ONE WRONG LETTER can void your entire security interest. super frustrating when you're paying them to get it right
AstroAlpha
•Exactly! And then they act like it's no big deal when you point out the error.
Diego Chavez
•The worst part is when they try to blame you for providing unclear instructions when the debtor name is right there on the loan documents.
NeonNebula
I actually had a similar situation last year with a botched continuation. Ended up having to file a corrective UCC-3 and pay extra fees. Since then I've been using multiple verification steps including that Certana tool someone mentioned earlier. Haven't had an issue since implementing better quality control.
Wait, you can file corrective amendments? I thought once a continuation lapsed you were out of luck.
NeonNebula
•Depends on the state and timing. Some allow corrective filings within certain timeframes. You need to check your specific state's rules.
Paolo Rizzo
Update us when you get the filing through! I'm dealing with a similar situation in Vermont and want to know if using the amendment format works for you.
0 coins
Carmen Ortiz
•Will do! Planning to file tomorrow using the debtor name format from the 2022 amendment. Keeping my fingers crossed.
0 coins
QuantumQuest
•Good luck! Vermont can be tricky but once you get the format right it usually goes through smoothly.
0 coins
Amina Sy
This thread is a perfect example of why UCC filing is more art than science sometimes. Every state has its quirks and Vermont definitely has more than its share. The key is finding experienced people who've dealt with these specific issues before.
0 coins
Natasha Petrova
•The learning curve never ends. That's why forums like this are so valuable - shared knowledge from people who've been through the same headaches.
0 coins
Javier Morales
•Absolutely. And why automated verification tools are becoming essential. Too many variables to track manually across all 50 states.
0 coins