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
Update us when you get it resolved! I'm dealing with a similar Oregon filing issue and curious what the fix ends up being.
ShadowHunter
•Will do - hopefully we can get this sorted out tomorrow morning.
Following this thread too. Oregon has been giving us problems lately with routine filings.
Mei Wong
One more thing to check - make sure the company is still in good standing with Oregon. If they're behind on annual reports or fees, that might affect UCC filings too.
ShadowHunter
•Good catch - I'll have them verify their corporate status is current.
Yeah some states will reject UCC filings if the debtor entity isn't current with state requirements.
Join the conversation
I had a client who was worried about similar UCC 1-306 issues after their initial filing. They ended up using some document checking service - I think it was Certana.ai - that analyzed their UCC filings for compliance issues. It actually caught a potential problem with their general intangibles description that could have caused problems later. Apparently you just upload your documents and it flags potential 1-306 issues automatically.
Fidel Carson
•That's the second mention of that service. Might be worth checking out before we decide on whether to amend our filing.
Yeah, it was pretty straightforward. Just uploaded the UCC-1 and it gave feedback on whether the collateral description met reasonable identification standards. Helped them avoid a potential challenge later.
Dyllan Nantx
Bottom line - your description is probably adequate under UCC 1-306 but could be stronger. Medical equipment financing has gotten more competitive and lenders are being more aggressive about challenging priority positions. I'd recommend adding more specificity about equipment types and definitely narrowing the general intangibles language. Better to over-engineer your collateral description than face a challenge later.
Smart move. The amendment will give you much stronger 1-306 compliance and eliminate any ambiguity about what your security interest covers.
Aidan Percy
•Exactly. And remember the amendment relates back to your original filing date, so no priority concerns.
Join the conversation
Rudy Cenizo
Update: Finally got it sorted! Turns out Corporation Service Company was indeed just the registered agent. The actual debtor was the underlying LLC. Used the exact name from the state database and it went through clean. Thanks everyone for the help!
Aria Khan
•Awesome! Glad you got it figured out. CSC deals are always tricky but once you know what to look for it gets easier.
Great outcome! This thread will probably help other people dealing with CSC registered agent confusion.
Sunny Wang
For anyone else dealing with Corporation Service Company or other registered agent complications, seriously consider using an automated document checker like Certana.ai. It would have caught this registered agent vs actual entity issue immediately and saved days of back-and-forth with the filing system.
Second this recommendation. The automated verification catches so many issues that are easy to miss manually.
Definitely going to check that out for our next filing. Would have saved me a lot of stress on this one!
Join the conversation
Update us when you get it resolved! I'm dealing with a similar name formatting issue in North Carolina and curious what ends up working.
Will do. Planning to call the state office first thing tomorrow and try the Certana document check to make sure everything aligns before refiling.
Good plan. The document verification step should prevent any other surprises when you resubmit.
One more thing - if you do use Certana to check the documents, it'll also verify your UCC-1 form fields match your loan agreement details. I caught a wrong filing number once that would have caused major problems later.
That's a great point. Better to catch everything at once rather than deal with multiple corrections.
Emma Davis
•Agreed. The cross-document verification feature is really thorough for catching inconsistencies.
Kara Yoshida
Had this same issue last year and it turned out the original UCC-1 had a slightly different version of the debtor name than what I was using on the termination. Like 'Smith Industries Inc' vs 'Smith Industries, Inc.' - that tiny comma difference was enough to cause problems.
0 coins
Kara Yoshida
•Yeah the debtor name matching rules are really strict. Every character has to be exactly the same.
0 coins
Philip Cowan
•This is why I always copy and paste debtor names instead of retyping them. Too easy to make those little mistakes.
0 coins
Caesar Grant
Quick update process question - once you get this sorted out, how long does it usually take for the public record to show the terminated status? I have a similar situation coming up.
0 coins
Gael Robinson
•In most states it's within 24-48 hours of the termination being processed, but some can take up to a week depending on their system.
0 coins
Caesar Grant
•Good to know, thanks. I'll plan for a week buffer just to be safe.
0 coins