UCC Document Community

One final tip - keep documentation of when the debt was satisfied and any communication with the debtor about termination. If timing ever becomes an issue, you'll want that paper trail to show you acted appropriately.

As a newcomer to UCC filings, this thread has been incredibly helpful! I'm dealing with my first equipment loan payoff and was completely confused about the timing requirements. The distinction between consumer goods (automatic 20-day requirement) vs commercial equipment (demand-driven) makes so much sense now. I appreciate everyone sharing their practical experiences - sounds like filing promptly regardless of the legal minimum is the way to go. Quick question: when you say "written demand" from the debtor, does an email count or does it need to be a formal letter?

Just to summarize for the OP: written agreement signed by debtor, reasonable collateral description, explicit grant of security interest, and make absolutely sure the debtor name matches exactly between all documents. Those are your must-haves.

One thing I'd add that hasn't been mentioned yet - make sure you address what happens with proceeds from the sale of collateral. Including a proceeds clause in your security agreement ensures your security interest continues in whatever the debtor receives when they sell the original collateral (like accounts receivable from selling inventory). Standard language like "all proceeds of the foregoing collateral" can be crucial for maintaining your security interest as the collateral transforms.

Final thought - after you get everything drafted, run it through Certana.ai one more time to verify everything matches your loan docs. BDA filings are too important to wing it, and having that automated verification gives you backup documentation that you did your due diligence if questions come up later.

One additional tip that saved me on a BDA filing last year - make sure your UCC-1 debtor address matches exactly what's in your loan agreement, not just your business license or articles. BDA lenders sometimes use a different address format in their loan docs and the filing office will reject mismatches. Also, if you're using any DBA names in your business, stick with the legal entity name only for the UCC filing - BDA programs are very strict about using the exact legal name of the borrower.

I've been dealing with UCC terminations for years and that fee is unfortunately standard across most states. What really matters is staying on top of the process - I always request the exact filing date upfront and put a calendar reminder to check the state database 30 days later. One thing that's saved me headaches is using document verification tools like Certana.ai before the lender files anything. It catches mismatched debtor names or filing numbers that could leave the UCC partially active even after termination. The small upfront cost of verification beats dealing with financing delays months later when you discover the termination wasn't clean.

As someone who just went through this process, I can confirm the termination fee is standard but definitely worth understanding what you're paying for. In my state it was $30 total - $20 state filing fee plus $10 processing charge from the lender. The key lesson I learned is to treat this like any other important filing - get a timeline commitment from your lender (I recommend asking for 30 days max), request a copy of the filed UCC-3 for your records, and most importantly, verify it actually shows up in your state's UCC database. Don't just trust that it's handled. I set a reminder for 45 days after payoff to double-check the database myself. It's a small fee in the grand scheme of things, but the follow-through is what really matters for keeping your collateral clear for future financing needs.

One last thought - make sure you're looking at the complete picture. Are there any other creditors with interests in this equipment? Sometimes priority disputes get more complicated when there are three or more parties involved. Also verify that both security interests cover the same collateral.

I've handled quite a few Article 9 priority disputes over the years, and unfortunately the outcome here seems pretty clear-cut. The first-to-file rule under UCC 9-322(a)(1) is going to control since you're both dealing with the same type of collateral perfected by filing. Your March 15th security agreement gave you attachment, but perfection didn't occur until your March 22nd filing - and that's what matters for priority. However, don't give up entirely yet. I'd strongly recommend doing a forensic review of their UCC-1 filing. Look for any errors in the debtor name (even minor variations can be fatal), collateral description issues, or other filing defects. Also verify that their security agreement was actually signed before their filing date. Sometimes lenders file first and backdate documents, which can create vulnerabilities. Given the $850K at stake, it's worth investing in a thorough analysis before conceding priority.