UCC Document Community

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 :)

Another vote for using automated tools to verify everything. I started using Certana.ai after a similar close call and it's caught several potential problems before filing. Worth it for the peace of mind alone, especially when you're dealing with UCC financing statement effectiveness issues where timing is critical.

0 coins

StarStrider

•

Do you use it for all your UCC work or just continuations?

0 coins

I use it anytime I'm filing something that references a previous UCC. Continuations, amendments, terminations. Basically anything where accuracy compared to the original filing matters.

0 coins

Ravi Gupta

•

Original poster here - thanks everyone for the detailed responses! Sounds like I need to wait until I'm within the 6-month window and be extra careful about matching all the details exactly. Going to double-check the debtor's current legal name and probably use one of those verification tools mentioned here. Really appreciate the practical advice from people who've been through this before.

0 coins

Omar Hassan

•

Let us know how it goes. Always interested to hear about people's filing experiences.

0 coins

The verification tools are definitely worth it. Small investment to avoid major problems.

0 coins

Equipment definition under UCC Article 9 is goods used or bought for use primarily in business - your manufacturing machinery clearly qualifies. The rejection is probably about description adequacy rather than classification. Try categorizing by function: 'metalworking equipment,' 'printing equipment,' etc. rather than just 'all equipment.

0 coins

Isaac Wright

•

Should we worry about equipment purchased after the initial filing? Does the 'hereafter acquired' language actually work?

0 coins

After-acquired property clauses are generally enforceable for equipment as long as the description is adequate. Just make sure your security agreement supports it.

0 coins

Lucy Taylor

•

Update: Used the specific equipment categories suggested here and added functional descriptions. Filed yesterday and got acceptance this morning! The key was breaking down 'equipment' into actual types: manufacturing equipment, metalworking machinery, computer-controlled production equipment, etc. Thanks everyone - this forum saved our financing timeline.

0 coins

KhalilStar

•

Glad it worked out. This thread will be helpful for others dealing with equipment description issues.

0 coins

Perfect example of why equipment description specificity matters. Congrats on getting the filing through!

0 coins

Document everything! I keep a search log showing every variation I tried, the date/time, and the results. If there's ever a question about due diligence, you have proof of your thoroughness.

0 coins

Liam Mendez

•

That's excellent advice. I'll start keeping a detailed log of all my searches.

0 coins

Make sure to save or print the actual search results too. Screenshots can be helpful but printouts are better for court if needed.

0 coins

Update: I ran 12 different search variations and found two additional filings that didn't show up in my initial searches. Both were terminated but still shows how easy it is to miss things. Thanks everyone for the advice - definitely saved me from a potential problem.

0 coins

Sophia Nguyen

•

Glad you found those! Always better to be overly thorough than to miss something important.

0 coins

Maya Patel

•

This is why I love this community. Everyone's war stories help the rest of us avoid the same mistakes.

0 coins

Ruby Knight

•

Actually just went through this with a client. Turns out we had filed under the wrong entity name entirely - used the parent company instead of the subsidiary. Had to file a UCC-3 amendment and it was a mess. Definitely verify your debtor name matches the actual borrowing entity.

0 coins

Ruby Knight

•

Caught it during a routine lien search thankfully. Could have been a disaster if we hadn't checked.

0 coins

Logan Stewart

•

Stories like this are why I always use document verification now. Too risky to rely on manual checking.

0 coins

Mikayla Brown

•

Update: Found the issue! The debtor name on our UCC-1 had 'LLC' but the charter documents show 'L.L.C.' with periods. Kentucky's search is very literal about punctuation. Going to file a UCC-3 amendment to correct it. Thanks everyone for the help - this could have been a major problem down the road.

0 coins

Ali Anderson

•

Perfect example of why document verification is so important. One punctuation mark can invalidate your entire security interest.

0 coins

Zadie Patel

•

Glad it worked out. These name matching issues are more common than people think.

0 coins

Prev1...496497498499500...684Next