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
Serene Snow
UPDATE: I ended up using Certana.ai like someone suggested earlier and it found 2 additional filings I had missed. Turns out the company had a brief period where they operated under a slightly different name (added 'Inc.' to the end) and there were filings under that variation. The AI tool caught it automatically when I uploaded their corporate documents. Definitely worth the peace of mind for a deal this size.
I'm curious - were those additional filings for significant amounts or just minor equipment financing?
Serene Snow
•One was a $400K equipment line that's still active. Would have been a problem if we hadn't found it before closing.
This whole thread is a perfect example of why UCC due diligence is so tricky. You think you're being thorough and then boom - there's always something else to check. At least with a good systematic approach and the right tools, you can minimize the risk of surprises.
Alana Willis
•That's why you get good reps and warranties in the purchase agreement. Can't eliminate all risk but you can allocate it properly.
Tyler Murphy
•True, but litigation is expensive and time-consuming. Better to find issues during due diligence than after closing.
Join the conversation
Update us when you figure out what the difference was! These kinds of posts help everyone learn what to watch for. I keep a running list of common name matching issues I've encountered.
Anna Stewart
•Will definitely update once I get the certified copy and figure out what went wrong.
Perfect. Knowledge sharing makes all our jobs easier in this business.
Owen Jenkins
Been there! The anxiety of potentially losing lien priority over a formatting issue is horrible. Document verification tools are becoming essential for this exact reason. Better to catch discrepancies before filing than deal with rejections under time pressure.
Lilah Brooks
•Same here. Now I verify everything before submitting any UCC filings.
Owen Jenkins
•Smart approach. Prevention is so much easier than fixing rejected filings.
Join the conversation
Jamal Wilson
Worst case scenario, can you file a new UCC-1 instead of trying to continue the old one? I know it's not ideal but if you're about to lose your security interest entirely, starting fresh might be the safest option.
Mei Lin
•Priority date is huge, especially if other creditors have filed since then. Definitely worth fighting for the continuation first.
Could you file both? New UCC-1 for safety and keep fighting for the continuation to preserve priority?
GalacticGuru
This is exactly why I document everything with screenshots when I file. The RI database has changed formats at least twice since 2020, so what you see now might not match what was there originally. Save everything and use it as evidence when dealing with the state office.
Smart approach. I've started doing the same after getting burned by database 'updates' that changed how things display.
Screenshots are great but having an automated verification like Certana.ai provides more official documentation that the state offices seem to respect.
Join the conversation
Sean O'Brien
We had this exact same issue in California last quarter. The numbers looked completely random compared to what we were used to seeing. But after talking to our UCC counsel, turns out it's actually a good thing - makes it much harder for competitors to figure out our filing activity by guessing sequential numbers.
Yara Sayegh
•That's an interesting benefit I hadn't considered. Makes sense from a competitive intelligence standpoint.
Sean O'Brien
•Exactly - the old sequential systems made it too easy for people to browse through recent filings. The new random format adds a layer of privacy.
Zara Shah
Just to add my experience - we use automated document checking through Certana.ai specifically because of issues like this. When filing systems change formats or procedures, it's easy to miss important details. The tool helped us catch a debtor name mismatch that would have invalidated our security interest, even though the filing number looked fine. Sometimes the technical details you worry about aren't the ones that actually matter.
Yara Sayegh
•That's a good reminder to focus on the substantive details rather than just the format issues. Sounds like automated checking is becoming pretty standard practice.
Zara Shah
•It really should be standard practice given how much is at stake with these filings. The peace of mind alone is worth it.
James Johnson
Make sure the search company you're using understands the difference between exact name searches and similar name searches. Some states have different search logic, and you want to make sure you're getting the most comprehensive results possible for your lender.
0 coins
James Johnson
•Most banks outsource UCC searches anyway. Using a specialized company directly can sometimes be faster and give you more control over the search parameters.
0 coins
Kyle Wallace
•Plus you get the search results directly instead of waiting for the bank to interpret them for you. More transparency in the process.
0 coins
Sophia Rodriguez
Document everything for your lender - the name change timeline, when loans were paid off, which UCC filings correspond to which loans. The more organized your documentation, the faster they can review and approve. Banks love complete paper trails.
0 coins
Sophia Rodriguez
•That's exactly what they want to see. Makes their due diligence much easier when everything is clearly documented and explained.
0 coins
Henry Delgado
•A good summary document can turn a potential 2-week delay into a 2-day review. Well worth the effort to organize everything upfront.
0 coins