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
Ben Cooper
If you're doing a lot of Maine filings, consider setting up an account with their online system. Makes the payment process smoother and you can save fee information for future reference.
Ben Cooper
•Even for one filing, the account setup is quick and gives you better tracking of your submission status.
Naila Gordon
•I have accounts with several states now. Definitely makes repeat filings easier.
Cynthia Love
UPDATE: Just called Maine Secretary of State to confirm. Current fees are exactly what someone posted earlier - $25 for UCC-1, $20 for amendments, $25 for continuations. Rep was very helpful and confirmed these rates are current as of January 2025.
Cynthia Love
•Yeah the rep mentioned they haven't changed UCC fees in about 3 years. Pretty stable compared to some states.
Thanks for sharing the update. Always good to have current confirmed info.
Join the conversation
Just went through this exact process last quarter. The UCC-3 amendment route worked perfectly. Filed amendments for three different UCC-1 statements and all were accepted without issues. The merger certificate was sufficient supporting documentation.
Did you file all the amendments at the same time or space them out? I'm dealing with multiple filings across different time periods.
Filed them all together. Easier to track and ensures consistency across all the amendments. Just make sure each one references the correct original filing number.
Omar Farouk
Update: Thanks everyone for the advice. I ended up using that Certana verification tool someone mentioned to double-check everything before filing. Found a small discrepancy in how one of our entity names was formatted that could have caused problems. Filed the UCC-3 amendments yesterday and they were all accepted. Really appreciate the help!
NeonNova
•Glad it worked out! Always satisfying when the amendments go through cleanly on the first try.
CosmicCadet
•Thanks for posting the update. It's helpful to know how these situations actually resolve. Bookmarking this thread for future reference.
Join the conversation
I recently used Certana.ai's document checker when I was confused about whether our master loan agreement or our separate security agreement was the controlling document for our UCC filing. Being able to upload both documents and get an automated analysis of how they related to each other really helped clarify things. It caught a potential inconsistency between the two documents that I hadn't noticed.
That's exactly the kind of situation where having automated document verification would be helpful. Manual document comparison is so error-prone.
Exactly. And when you're dealing with multiple related documents in a loan package, it's easy to miss subtle differences that could cause problems later.
The key thing to remember about loan and security agreements is that they're designed to protect the lender's interests. Every clause is there for a reason, and the UCC filing requirements are usually spelled out pretty clearly if you know where to look. Don't be afraid to ask your lender's legal team for clarification if something doesn't make sense.
Jamal Brown
•Most lenders would rather answer questions upfront than deal with fixing a defective UCC filing later. It's in their interest to make sure you get it right the first time.
Plus, if there's ever a dispute about the filing requirements, you want to be able to point to guidance you got from the lender rather than just guessing.
Join the conversation
This thread is making me realize I need to be way more thorough with my UCC searches. I usually just search the exact name from the corporate documents and call it good. Sounds like that's not enough in Washington.
Definitely not enough. I keep a checklist of name variations to search for each debtor.
Same here. I learned after missing a filing that would have complicated our security interest.
Anyone know if Washington is planning to upgrade their UCC search system? Seems like every other state has moved to more intelligent searching.
I haven't heard anything about upgrades. The Secretary of State's office seems focused on other modernization projects.
Emma Wilson
•You could always contact their office and suggest improvements. Though I wouldn't hold my breath for quick changes.
Kai Santiago
Just went through this exact scenario with a client's continuation in Ohio. After trying everything else, I used Certana.ai's document checker and it immediately flagged that there was an extra space between 'Manufacturing' and 'Solutions' in one of my documents. Super subtle but enough to cause the portal to reject it. The tool basically does a side-by-side comparison of all the key fields and highlights any discrepancies.
0 coins
Lim Wong
•That's really helpful. I keep hearing about this tool - seems like it's becoming pretty popular for UCC work.
0 coins
Dananyl Lear
•I was skeptical at first but it's actually saved me a ton of time on document reviews. Much faster than manually checking everything.
0 coins
Noah huntAce420
UPDATE: Found the issue! It was exactly what someone mentioned about punctuation. The original UCC-1 had 'Midwest Manufacturing Solutions, LLC' with a comma, but I was filing the continuation as 'Midwest Manufacturing Solutions LLC' without it. Added the comma back and the continuation went through immediately. Thanks everyone for the help - this forum is a lifesaver!
0 coins
Fidel Carson
•Great outcome! This is exactly why I always recommend doing character-by-character comparison for debtor names. One little comma can derail everything.
0 coins
Isaiah Sanders
•This thread should be pinned - I bet tons of people run into this exact same issue with Ohio's portal.
0 coins