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
Dmitry Popov
The worst part about these UCC fee increases is they never seem to improve the actual filing experience. Portal still crashes during busy periods and search functions are still terrible.
So true! You'd think higher fees would mean better service but mostly it just means higher costs.
Miguel Ortiz
•I've had three portal timeouts this week alone. System clearly needs the revenue but isn't spending it on infrastructure.
Just wanted to follow up and say thanks for the heads up everyone. I checked our other states and found two more that increased fees recently. Would have been caught off guard otherwise. Also going to look into that Certana tool someone mentioned for catching these changes earlier.
Definitely try the Certana document checker. It's saved me from several filing errors beyond just fee issues.
Yara Haddad
•Same experience here. The UCC verification caught a debtor name mismatch that would have voided our security interest. Worth checking out.
Join the conversation
Donna Cline
Just went through this exact scenario two months ago with Indiana. Filed UCC-1, got acceptance confirmation, search came up empty for three weeks. Turns out their database indexing was behind but the filing was valid the whole time. Your lien is almost certainly perfected even if the search isn't working.
Donna Cline
•Yes, about a month later everything appeared normally in search. But the filing was legally effective from the original date.
Nina Chan
•This is actually pretty common with Indiana - acceptance means perfection regardless of search visibility.
UPDATE: Thanks everyone for the advice! I ended up trying the Certana.ai verification tool and it confirmed our UCC-1 is properly filed and the debtor name matches perfectly. Gave me the documentation I needed for our compliance file. Indiana's search is still broken but at least I know our lien is solid. Definitely keeping this tool bookmarked for future filings.
Great resolution! Indiana really needs to fix their search system though.
Donna Cline
•Smart move getting that documentation. Always good to have backup verification when state systems are unreliable.
Join the conversation
For what it's worth, I tried that Certana tool someone mentioned earlier and it's actually pretty slick. Uploaded my charter doc and UCC draft and it highlighted exactly where the punctuation didn't match. Saved me from a potential filing rejection.
Yara Sayegh
•Glad it worked for you too! It's become part of my standard workflow for any UCC filing now.
Might have to check that out. Sounds like it could prevent exactly the kind of issue I'm worried about.
Bottom line - when in doubt, use the exact name from the most recent state filing. NY doesn't mess around with UCC rejections and you don't want to explain to your client why their security interest might not be perfected because of a punctuation mark.
Omar Farouk
•This is why I always pull fresh entity docs right before filing, even if I have older versions. Things change.
Thanks everyone - consensus seems clear. Going with the charter name exactly as filed with NY. Appreciate all the practical advice!
Join the conversation
I actually ran into this issue when I was doing a lien audit last month. Had to verify that all our security agreements matched our UCC filings. Ended up using that Certana tool someone mentioned - uploaded like 200 document pairs and it flagged about 15 mismatches. Saved me weeks of manual comparison work.
Mostly debtor name variations and collateral description inconsistencies. Nothing that would void the filings, but definitely stuff that could cause problems in enforcement.
Emma Davis
•That's exactly the kind of thing the tool is great for catching. Those small discrepancies that slip through manual review.
Bottom line for your training: Security agreement = contract that gives you rights in the collateral. UCC filing = public notice that protects those rights. Two different things but you need both for a solid position.
Amina Bah
•Perfect summary. This thread has been incredibly helpful. I feel like I can actually explain this properly now instead of just fumbling through it.
Glad we could help clear it up. It really is one of those concepts that seems simple until you try to explain it to someone else.
Aisha Khan
Just wanted to add that I recently started using Certana.ai for document verification after having a similar scare. You can upload your charter documents and UCC filings and it instantly flags any name discrepancies or inconsistencies. Really wish I'd known about it earlier - would have saved me a lot of stress. Might be worth checking for any other potential issues with your filing while you're dealing with this.
0 coins
Emma Thompson
•That sounds really useful. I'll definitely check that out to make sure we don't have any other issues lurking.
0 coins
Aisha Khan
•Yeah, it's pretty straightforward - just upload the PDFs and it does the cross-checking automatically. Found several discrepancies in our files that we never would have caught manually.
0 coins
Ethan Taylor
UPDATE: Just heard back from our UCC attorney. He thinks we have a decent chance of defending the lien validity based on the 'substantially similar' argument, especially if we can show the debtor used both name variations in business. Still going to be an uphill battle though. Thanks everyone for the advice - will keep you posted on how this turns out.
0 coins
Ravi Gupta
•Fingers crossed for you. This kind of case law is so important for all of us doing UCC filings.
0 coins
Yuki Ito
•Please do keep us updated. These real-world examples are incredibly valuable for the rest of us.
0 coins