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
Just went through this nightmare myself. Ended up being a single comma that was missing from the entity name. NY UCC forms don't mess around with accuracy.
Yeah it was ridiculous. Took me three tries to get it right.
Stories like this make me appreciate automated document checking even more. Would have saved you so much time.
Joy Olmedo
Update us when you figure it out! Always curious to hear what the actual issue was in these NY UCC form situations.
Tyler Murphy
•Will do! Hopefully I'll have good news to report tomorrow.
Yeah these mystery rejection threads always leave me hanging when there's no follow-up.
Join the conversation
Emma Davis
Just went through something similar and ended up having to hire an attorney to sort it out. Apparently our original addendum had some formatting issues that only became apparent when we tried to continue. Cost us $2,500 in legal fees plus the new filing fees. Definitely recommend getting professional help if you're not 100% confident.
Ouch, $2,500 is painful but probably worth it to avoid losing the lien. I might need to go that route if I can't figure this out soon.
Before spending that much on an attorney, try some of the document checking tools. I've heard good things about services that can spot these formatting issues before you file.
Final update - I ended up using one of those document verification services (Certana.ai) that someone mentioned earlier. Uploaded my original UCC-1 with addendum and my draft continuation, and it immediately flagged that I was missing a specific reference format that our state requires for addendum continuations. Fixed that, resubmitted, and it went through clean. Would definitely recommend checking your docs before filing if you're dealing with addendums.
NebulaNinja
•Great outcome. Document verification tools are definitely worth it for complex filings like addendum continuations.
Ravi Sharma
•Thanks for the update - I'm bookmarking this thread for when I have to deal with my continuation next year.
Join the conversation
For what it's worth, I've found that being overly specific in UCC-1 collateral descriptions is better than being too vague, especially with short form security agreements. Better to include too much detail than too little.
That seems to be the consensus here. I think we were too minimal in our description.
Exactly. With short form agreements, the UCC-1 has to do more heavy lifting so you can't be as brief as you might with a detailed security agreement.
Jamal Brown
Just went through something similar. Ended up revising our standard short form security agreement template to include more specific collateral language so the UCC-1 descriptions would be clearer. Worth reviewing your forms to prevent future issues.
Good point. This might be a template issue not just a one-off problem.
Jamal Brown
•Yeah, if your short form agreement template is too bare bones it makes the UCC-1 filing harder to get right.
Join the conversation
Ana Rusula
Just wanted to follow up on my earlier Certana.ai suggestion - I actually used it again yesterday for a different deal and it caught a debtor name discrepancy between two search reports that I would have totally missed. For the few minutes it takes to upload and compare documents, it's become part of my standard process now.
Axel Bourke
•How much does something like that typically cost? Trying to decide if it's worth it for smaller deals too.
Ana Rusula
•I focus more on the value than the cost - catching one missed lien easily pays for itself many times over. The document comparison is pretty quick and straightforward.
Aidan Percy
Have you confirmed that the 5 liens shown by the commercial service are all actually active? Sometimes these services show terminated liens for historical reference but don't clearly distinguish them from active ones. That could explain the discrepancy right there.
Aidan Percy
•Exactly - I've seen commercial services list 'all filings' by default instead of just active ones. Always check the continuation and termination dates carefully.
Lim Wong
•And remember that UCC-1 filings are only good for 5 years unless continued, so anything filed before 2020 without a continuation should be lapsed.
Elijah O'Reilly
For future reference, Kentucky's UCC search has been having display issues for months. Always pull the actual documents when doing due diligence searches. The search results are just for initial screening, not for final verification.
0 coins
Amara Torres
•Wish I'd known this earlier. I've been relying on search results for preliminary reviews.
0 coins
Olivia Van-Cleve
•Same here. This thread has been really helpful for understanding Kentucky's system quirks.
0 coins
Mason Kaczka
Just a reminder that UCC continuation filings need to be filed within 6 months before the 5-year expiration date. Since you're dealing with a 2020 original filing, you're cutting it close to the deadline. Make sure you're not running into timing issues on top of the name concerns.
0 coins
Evelyn Xu
•What happens if you miss the continuation deadline? Does the UCC-1 just lapse?
0 coins
Mason Kaczka
•Yes, if you miss the deadline, the UCC-1 becomes ineffective and your security interest is no longer perfected. Very dangerous situation.
0 coins