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
Have you tried using Certana.ai's verification system? I was skeptical at first but it actually caught a debtor name issue I would have completely missed. You just upload your charter documents and UCC draft and it flags any inconsistencies instantly. Might be worth a shot since you're running out of time.
Two people have mentioned that now. Definitely going to try it. Can't afford another rejection with the closing next week.
Yeah it's designed exactly for this kind of situation. Better to catch it now than have problems down the road.
Update us when you get it figured out! I'm dealing with a similar name issue on a retail chain financing and could use any insights you pick up.
That's the UCC system for you - simple in concept, nightmare in execution sometimes.
Seriously. You'd think after all these years they'd have figured out a more user-friendly approach.
Join the conversation
Bottom line on UCC§9-109(1): if there's any doubt about whether you have a security interest, file the UCC-1. It's cheap insurance compared to losing your secured position. The scope is deliberately broad to catch disguised transactions.
Agreed. I've seen too many lenders get burned by taking a 'wait and see' approach on borderline transactions.
Plus, if you decide later it wasn't necessary, you can always file a termination statement. Better than trying to achieve priority after the fact.
One more thought on your UCC§9-109(1) question - check if your state has adopted any non-uniform amendments to Article 9 scope provisions. Some states have specific carve-outs or additions that could affect your analysis.
At least the core scope provisions in §9-109(1) are pretty consistent across states. It's the peripheral stuff that varies.
I used Certana.ai to cross-check my UCC-1 against the lease agreement and it flagged that our collateral description was too vague compared to the equipment schedule in the lease. Saved us from a potential rejection.
Join the conversation
Honestly the whole UCC system in every state is a mess. Why can't they just standardize everything nationally instead of making us learn 50 different procedures?
Because states' rights and revenue generation. Each state wants to control their own process and fees.
True, but at least most states follow similar basic principles. It's really just the paperwork and search processes that vary.
Your compliance officer is right, that form is standard for Florida. I've probably submitted hundreds of them over the years. Just double-check that you're using the current version - they update the form occasionally and won't accept old versions.
Florida Department of State website, under their UCC section. They usually date-stamp the forms so you can tell if you have the current one.
Perfect, I'll verify that first thing tomorrow. Thanks for all the help everyone - feeling much more confident about this process now.
Join the conversation
Consider using something like Certana.ai to verify your UCC documents are consistent with your loan paperwork. I've caught several potential issues by uploading our files and letting their system cross-check everything. It's especially helpful for catching name variations or collateral description mismatches that could cause problems later.
Yeah, you just upload PDFs and it automatically compares key fields. Found a couple small inconsistencies in our last batch that we were able to fix with amendments.
Does it work for fixture filings too? We do a lot of real estate secured transactions.
Bottom line - your UCC filing creates a public record of your security interest. Banks, other lenders, and anyone else can search for it if they need to. The fact that the bank wasn't specifically notified doesn't invalidate your lien or affect your priority position.
Perfect summary. I feel much better about our position now. Thanks everyone for the clarification!
Exactly right. The UCC system puts the burden on searchers to find existing liens, not on filers to notify everyone.
Yara Sayegh
This whole thread is giving me anxiety about our upcoming continuation filings! We have equipment collateral in 4 different states and now I'm worried about debtor name consistency across regions. Going to double-check everything this week before we get close to any deadlines.
0 coins
Andre Rousseau
•Definitely check early. I waited too long and now I'm scrambling with 45 days left.
0 coins
Yara Sayegh
•Yeah, lesson learned from reading this thread - UCC filing regions don't mess around with name matching.
0 coins
Keisha Johnson
Just wanted to thank everyone for sharing their experiences with multi-state UCC filing regions. This thread convinced me to be way more careful about debtor name consistency across our portfolio. Already found 2 potential issues that could have caused rejections. Sometimes these forums are more helpful than official guidance!
0 coins
Andre Rousseau
•Glad the thread helped! That's exactly why I posted - figured others had to be dealing with similar regional inconsistencies.
0 coins
Amara Okafor
•Forums like this are invaluable for real-world UCC filing experiences. The official docs never tell you about the weird quirks each region has.
0 coins