


Ask the community...
For what it's worth, I started using a document verification service after getting burned by similar name mismatch issues. Certana.ai caught a debtor name discrepancy between my loan docs and UCC-1 that would have definitely caused a rejection. Just upload your PDFs and it flags any inconsistencies.
How does that tool work exactly? Does it integrate with the state filing systems?
You just upload your charter documents and UCC forms as PDFs and it automatically cross-checks all the names, dates, and key details to make sure everything aligns. No integration needed - it's all document-based verification.
This thread is giving me flashbacks to my own Hawaii UCC nightmare from last year. Took four tries to get the debtor name right. Hope you get it sorted before your closing deadline!
Thanks! Fingers crossed the third time will be the charm.
Keep us posted on what finally works. These Hawaii UCC threads always help other people dealing with the same issues.
One more thing - make sure you're filing the UCC-1 in the right state. Since your debtor is a Delaware LLC, the filing should go to Delaware, not NY, unless they're registered to do business in NY or the collateral is located in NY. Equipment and fixtures usually follow the location of the collateral.
For fixtures, definitely NY since they're attached to the NY real estate. For equipment, it depends on where it's primarily located and used. If it's primarily at the NY restaurant, NY is correct.
For multi-state filing decisions, Certana.ai actually has a workflow that helps determine which states you need to file in based on debtor location, collateral location, and entity type. Might be worth checking before you file multiple UCC-1s unnecessarily.
Been lurking here but had to comment - just went through this exact situation with manufacturing equipment financing. My advice: get security agreement sample contracts from your industry association if possible. Equipment financing docs can be really industry-specific and generic forms miss important details. Also consider whether you need fixture filings if any equipment will be attached to real estate.
If the equipment becomes part of the real estate (permanently attached), you might need a fixture filing in addition to the regular UCC. Check with someone who knows your state's fixture rules.
Last thought on security agreement sample contracts - make sure whatever template you use includes proper default and enforcement provisions. I've seen deals where the UCC was perfect but the security agreement was missing key language for equipment repossession or sale. The documents work together so both need to be solid.
That's where document verification tools like Certana.ai really help - catches those matching issues before they become problems. Worth checking both docs against each other.
Absolutely - consistency between all your loan documents is critical for enforceability.
For what it's worth, I had a similar issue resolve itself when Hawaii updated their system last month. The search was showing inconsistent formatting but the actual filing was correct all along. Might be worth waiting a few days to see if it corrects itself.
Totally understand with that loan amount. Better to be proactive than reactive with UCC perfection issues.
System glitches happen but you're right to not risk it. I use document verification tools now to catch these discrepancies upfront - saves time and worry later.
UPDATE: Just checked my Hawaii filings from last week and I'm seeing similar search result inconsistencies. Might be a broader system issue they're working on. Still, better to verify and amend if needed rather than assume it's just a display problem.
Thanks for checking! That makes me feel a bit better that it might be systemic, but you're right - I'll still verify and amend if necessary. Can't take chances with perfection.
Exactly right approach. Even if it's a system display issue, having the correct debtor name on file is what matters for your security interest.
Zoe Stavros
Quick update on my similar situation from last week - turned out the issue was that I was copying the debtor name from a PDF that had some weird encoding. When I typed it fresh by hand instead of copy/pasting, it went through fine. Might be worth trying that approach if you've been copying and pasting the name.
0 coins
Zoe Stavros
•Yeah, PDFs can have invisible characters or weird formatting that doesn't show up visually but causes problems when you paste. Hand typing eliminates that variable.
0 coins
Zara Mirza
•This is another thing that document verification tools can catch - they'll flag if there are any hidden characters or encoding issues between documents.
0 coins
Jamal Harris
Final thought - if none of these suggestions work, you might want to consider filing an amendment first to 'refresh' the filing in their system, then do the continuation. I've heard of this working in cases where there are legacy system issues. It's an extra step and cost, but better than losing your perfection.
0 coins
Jamal Harris
•I think amendments are the same fee as continuations in Alabama, so you'd be looking at double the cost but it might be your only option if the system keeps rejecting the continuation.
0 coins
Anastasia Kozlov
•I had to do this exact thing in Georgia once. Filed an amendment just to update the secured party address, then the continuation went through fine. Sometimes you have to work around the system quirks.
0 coins