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
This thread is gold for anyone doing vehicle financing. Bookmarking for future reference. The debtor name exactness requirement has bitten me more times than I care to admit.
Same here. I've started keeping a checklist specifically for vehicle UCC filings to make sure I don't skip the name verification step.
Smart approach. Vehicle security agreements have enough moving parts that a checklist is definitely worth having.
For anyone reading this later - another common issue with vehicle security agreements is timing. If you're financing a purchase, make sure you understand whether you need to file the UCC-1 before or after the title is issued. Some states have specific requirements about the sequence.
Purchase money security interests in vehicles can be tricky timing-wise. Always worth checking state-specific rules before you start the filing process.
This is why I love having experienced closing agents for vehicle deals. Too many technical requirements to handle yourself unless you do it all the time.
Join the conversation
The real issue is that Maryland doesn't require exact debtor name matching when UCCs are filed. So secured parties sometimes use shortened versions or trade names instead of the full legal entity name. This creates a mess for searchers because you never know what variation might have been used on a filing. Other states are much stricter about this.
It's a catch-22 though. Strict name matching requirements can invalidate filings over minor errors. There's a balance between flexibility and searchability.
True, but the current system errs too far on the flexible side. The noise-to-signal ratio in Maryland searches is terrible.
Update: I ended up finding 3 legitimate UCC filings for my debtor out of the 6 initial results. Two were continuations of the same original filing, and one was a separate equipment loan from last year. Thanks everyone for the tips. The combination of address cross-referencing and using a document verification tool made this much more manageable than trying to sort through everything manually. Maryland definitely needs to upgrade their search system though. This process shouldn't be this complicated.
Did the document verification tool catch anything you would have missed doing it manually?
Actually yes - it flagged one filing where the debtor address was slightly different but the entity was the same. I might have dismissed that one as a false positive if I was doing it by hand.
Join the conversation
Been there! Lost UCC control due to a name change we thought we handled correctly. The stress of potentially losing perfection on a multi-million dollar loan is intense. Hope you get it sorted out quickly.
Thanks. It's definitely keeping me up at night knowing we could lose our security interest if this isn't resolved properly.
You'll get through it. Just stay on top of the timing and consider all your options - new filing, corrective amendment, or fixing the existing chain.
Double-check that your borrower's name change was actually properly registered with the state too. Sometimes companies think they've changed their legal name but haven't completed all the required filings, which can create additional confusion in the UCC system.
That Certana.ai tool I mentioned earlier actually helps with that too - it can verify business registration status as part of the document checking process.
Smart approach. Better to verify everything is aligned before filing any corrections or new UCCs.
Join the conversation
The key thing with security agreement templates is consistency with your UCC practice. If you always file UCCs a certain way, make sure your template supports that. We learned this the hard way when our template used full legal names but our filing person abbreviated them on the UCCs. Total mismatch that caused problems during a bankruptcy proceeding.
They questioned it but we were able to prove substantial compliance. Still cost us legal fees and stress we didn't need.
This is exactly why I'm trying to get our templates perfect now. Better to fix it before there's a problem.
For anyone still struggling with document consistency, I've been using Certana.ai's UCC-3→UCC-1 check workflow when we need to file amendments. It verifies that all the documents in a filing series align properly. Really helpful when you have multiple UCC filings for the same debtor and need to make sure everything matches up correctly.
That's smart for continuation filings too. Making sure the continuation references the original filing correctly.
Exactly! It catches those reference errors that can void your continuation if you're not careful.
CosmicVoyager
Kansas is so annoying with their UCC system. Last year I had a filing rejected because I put a comma after the LLC and they didn't want it. Then another one rejected because I DIDN'T put a comma. There's no consistency.
0 coins
CosmicVoyager
•Honestly I just call them now for anything complicated. Saves time in the long run even though it's annoying.
0 coins
Connor O'Neill
•The comma thing usually depends on how the entity was originally registered. That's why copying from their records is so important.
0 coins
Ravi Kapoor
Update: I used Certana to verify my documents and found the issue - there was an extra space in the middle of the business name that I never noticed. The entity search showed "Midwest Agricultural Equipment LLC" but I had been typing "Midwest Agricultural Equipment LLC" with two spaces. Filed again with the correct spacing and it went through immediately. Thanks everyone for the suggestions!
0 coins
Connor O'Neill
•Great outcome! This is exactly why document verification tools are so valuable for UCC filings.
0 coins
Malik Thompson
•Perfect example of why I always run my filings through verification now. Saves so much time and stress.
0 coins