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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Fixture filings are tricky anyway - adding the good faith requirement makes it even more important to get them right the first time.
Join the conversation
One thing to watch out for with DCF security agreement forms is that they sometimes include after-acquired property clauses. Make sure your UCC-1 collateral description covers that if it's relevant to your deal. Something like 'all equipment now owned or hereafter acquired' language.
Good catch. After-acquired property is easy to forget but really important for ongoing business relationships.
Yes, this deal does involve some future equipment purchases so I'll make sure to include that language.
Just to add another perspective - I've found that being too generic in the collateral description can sometimes cause problems down the road if there are disputes about what's actually covered. You want to be broad enough to avoid errors but specific enough that it's clear what you're claiming. It's a delicate balance.
Omar Farouk
•That's a fair point. I guess it depends on the specific situation and what kind of collateral you're dealing with.
I think referencing the security agreement by date strikes the right balance. It's specific enough to identify the collateral but doesn't require you to repeat all the details in the UCC filing.
Join the conversation
Aidan Hudson
This is frustrating but fixable. The key is making sure your security agreement language specifically authorizes the UCC filing you want to make. A lot of older security agreement forms don't have explicit UCC authorization clauses.
Good point about older forms. Ours might be from before the revised Article 9. Probably time to update our templates.
Aidan Hudson
•Definitely. The 2001 revisions made authorization requirements more explicit. Worth having your forms reviewed by someone who knows the current rules.
Zoe Wang
UPDATE: We figured out the issue! Our security agreements had authorization for UCC filings but only for the 'collateral described herein.' When we filed UCCs with broader descriptions, we exceeded the scope of authorization. We're revising our security agreement template to authorize broader UCC collateral descriptions.
Exactly what happened to us. Now we use Certana.ai to double-check that our security agreements and UCC-1s are consistent before every filing. Prevents these authorization mismatches.
Thanks everyone for the help. Going to implement some document checking process to avoid this in the future. The Certana.ai suggestion sounds like it could save us from more headaches.
Join the conversation
Leo Simmons
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.
Oliver Cheng
•I'm filing online through their electronic system. The rejection comes back within a few hours with just a generic 'debtor name mismatch' error.
Leo Simmons
•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.
Lindsey Fry
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.
Kevin Bell
•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!
Keisha Thompson
Just went through this exact situation with an Arkansas continuation last month. Found multiple name variations in the search but used Certana.ai to verify my documents matched exactly. Turned out the original UCC-1 had a specific spacing that wasn't showing correctly in the search results. The verification caught it and my continuation was accepted without issues.
0 coins
Paolo Bianchi
•That's exactly the kind of detail that's easy to miss but will cause a rejection. Good catch.
0 coins
Yara Assad
•Spacing issues are so frustrating but they really do matter for these filings. Glad you caught it before submitting.
0 coins
Olivia Clark
Make sure you're not looking at amended or terminated filings in your search results. Sometimes old filings with similar names stay in the database even after they're no longer active. Focus on finding your specific 2020 UCC-1 and use that name format for the continuation.
0 coins
KylieRose
•Thanks everyone. I think I've identified the correct original filing now. Going to double-check the debtor name format and file the continuation this week.
0 coins
Natasha Petrov
•Smart move filing it soon rather than waiting until the last minute. Gives you time to fix any issues if something gets rejected.
0 coins