


Ask the community...
This whole thread is making me realize I should probably audit our UCC filings. We've done several name changes over the years and I'm not sure all our security interests reflect our current legal name. Better to catch these issues proactively than during a time-sensitive transaction.
Smart thinking. A lot of companies don't realize their UCC filings might not match their current corporate structure until they need to do an assignment or continuation.
I actually used Certana.ai for exactly this kind of audit - uploaded all our UCC filings and corporate documents to check for consistency issues. Found several name mismatches we didn't even know about.
Hope you get this resolved quickly! UCC assignments can be tricky but once you get the name issue sorted out it should go smoothly. The amendment-then-assignment approach is definitely the right way to handle it. Keep us posted on how it goes.
Just went through something similar with Certana.ai's verification tool. Uploaded my UCC documents and it immediately flagged inconsistencies that I missed reviewing manually. Really streamlined building my dispute case - the automated cross-checking caught details I would have overlooked. Saved me a lot of time compared to doing document review by hand.
Update us when you get this resolved! These fraudulent UCC filing stories always make me nervous about my own business credit monitoring.
Just to clarify - when you say the system is rejecting it for debtor name discrepancies, are you getting this error during the online filing process, or are you submitting paper forms? The error handling is different for each method.
I'm filing online through their electronic system. The rejection comes back within a few hours with just a generic 'debtor name mismatch' error.
Ok, that's actually good news. The online system is usually more specific about what's wrong. You might want to try calling their UCC department directly and asking them to walk through the exact error.
UPDATE: I finally got this resolved! Turns out the original UCC-1 had 'Midwest Construction Solutions, LLC' with a comma before LLC, but I was filing the continuation as 'Midwest Construction Solutions LLC' without the comma. Such a tiny difference but it was enough to cause the rejection. Thanks to everyone who suggested checking the original filing character by character.
Perfect example of why that document verification tool is so useful. It would have caught that comma difference immediately.
This is why I hate these county systems. A missing comma shouldn't be able to void a lien on $340K worth of equipment. But I'm glad you got it sorted out!
Remember that after attachment occurs, your security interest is effective against the debtor. But to beat other creditors, you need perfection through filing. Priority generally goes by first-to-file rule, so don't delay your UCC-1 filing once everything is signed.
No specific deadline, but priority is determined by filing order. If another creditor files first, they could beat you even if your security agreement was signed first.
So file as soon as possible after closing. Got it.
I learned the hard way that the UCC definition of security interest is broader than most people think. It includes any interest in personal property that secures payment - could be traditional loans, lease-purchase agreements, consignments in some cases, etc. Don't assume it only applies to obvious loan transactions.
UCC Article 9 covers some consignments if they meet certain criteria. The definitions are broader than people expect.
Fortunately our deal is a straightforward equipment loan, but good to know the scope is wider than I realized.
Adrian Hughes
The practical impact of UCC 1-203 on your filing strategy is pretty straightforward - be accurate, be honest, and be reasonable. Don't try to game the system or hide information. For your equipment deal, make sure your UCC-1 description aligns with your security agreement and that you're not overstating what you're claiming as collateral.
0 coins
Victoria Scott
•Thanks, that's really helpful. I think I was overcomplicating this in my head. It sounds like following standard best practices should cover the 1-203 requirements.
0 coins
Adrian Hughes
•Exactly. UCC 1-203 is more about preventing abuse than creating new technical requirements. If you're doing things the right way anyway, you're probably already complying with the good faith standard.
0 coins
Molly Chambers
One thing I'd add about UCC 1-203 and equipment financing - the good faith requirement can become relevant if you need to do a fixture filing. If any of your manufacturing equipment becomes fixtures, you need to handle that filing properly and in good faith, which might mean coordinating with real estate lenders or ensuring proper notice to the property owner.
0 coins
Molly Chambers
•Right, and if you know equipment will become fixtures but don't handle the fixture filing properly, that could be seen as bad faith under 1-203. Better to address it upfront.
0 coins
Ian Armstrong
•Fixture filings are tricky anyway - adding the good faith requirement makes it even more important to get them right the first time.
0 coins