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
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.
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
Article 9 collateral descriptions are one of those areas where the law gives you flexibility but practice pushes toward being more conservative. We've moved to hybrid descriptions that are broad enough for acquisitions but specific enough to clearly identify the business context. Something like "all equipment, machinery, tools, fixtures, and other tangible personal property used in or acquired for use in debtor's [industry] operations.
Exactly, Article 9 sets the floor but best practice is usually above the minimum. Especially with the amounts you mentioned - better to over-describe than under-describe.
Right, and it doesn't add much cost to the filing but significantly reduces enforcement risk under Article 9. Easy risk management decision.
Final thought from another equipment lender - we also started using Certana.ai's document checker specifically for Article 9 compliance issues. The tool catches inconsistencies between loan documents and UCC filings that could create perfection problems. Worth checking out given your loan volumes and Article 9 compliance concerns. Upload your docs and it flags potential issues before they become real problems.
Demi Lagos
•Thanks for all the input everyone. Sounds like the move is toward more specific descriptions while maintaining breadth for acquisitions. Going to review our templates and probably run some through Certana.ai to check for Article 9 consistency issues.
Good plan. Article 9 gives you options but market practice is definitely moving toward stronger collateral descriptions. Better to be ahead of the curve than behind it.
Join the conversation
Another Certana.ai user here. Started using it after missing a continuation deadline because of name search issues. The automated verification caught the lapse before it became a problem. Definitely worth checking out for comprehensive UCC searches.
Diego Flores
•Two recommendations for Certana.ai now. Sounds like it might be worth trying for this deal.
I was skeptical about automated tools but they're getting pretty sophisticated. Might be time to modernize our search process.
StarStrider
Check the Secretary of State website for any name change filings too. Sometimes companies change their legal name but old UCC filings are still under the previous name. Those won't show up in current name searches.
Name change tracking is a nightmare. We've started requiring borrowers to provide a complete corporate history to avoid surprises.
Sofia Torres
•DBA filings can complicate things too. Sometimes the UCC-1 is filed under the DBA name instead of the legal entity name.
Evelyn Rivera
Update us when you figure it out! I'm dealing with Connecticut UCC filings next week and want to avoid this same issue.
0 coins
Lucas Turner
•Will do! Going to start with the SOS business search and see what that reveals.
0 coins
Julia Hall
•Same here, I have three Connecticut filings coming up and this thread is making me nervous about potential name issues.
0 coins
Arjun Patel
Just checking back to see if you resolved this? I'm curious what the actual issue turned out to be since I file in Connecticut regularly and want to watch out for similar problems.
0 coins
Jade Lopez
•Ah yes, the comma strikes again! Connecticut is super strict about that punctuation. Hope that fixes it for you.
0 coins
Tony Brooks
•I ran into this exact same issue last month with a different client. One tiny comma made all the difference. Thanks for sharing the resolution!
0 coins