


Ask the community...
One more thing to consider - make sure your collateral description in the UCC-1 matches what's in your all assets security agreement. I've seen cases where the UCC filing was more restrictive than the underlying security agreement, which limited the lender's rights.
Good catch. The UCC-1 should reflect the full scope of the all assets security agreement to maximize collateral coverage.
That's another area where document verification tools like Certana.ai can help. It checks that the collateral descriptions are consistent between your security agreement and UCC filings.
Glad you got the debtor name sorted out. With all assets security agreements covering equipment, inventory, accounts receivable and general intangibles, you're well-positioned once the UCC-1 is filed properly. The $850K line should be well-secured with that comprehensive collateral package.
Manufacturing businesses usually have substantial equipment and inventory values, so all assets coverage makes sense for that loan size.
The general intangibles coverage is particularly valuable for manufacturing companies. Could include things like customer lists, proprietary processes, or intellectual property.
Bottom line for your situation - file the UCC-1 with 'ABC Manufacturing Solutions LLC' as the debtor name, make sure your security agreement broadly covers all receivables generated by that entity, and you should be fine. The trade name issue is a red herring.
Exactly. I've never seen a court invalidate a properly filed UCC just because the debtor does business under a shortened version of their legal name.
The key is 'properly filed' - which means using the exact charter name on the UCC-1.
Thanks everyone - going to refile with the full LLC designation and update our security agreement language to be more explicit about covering all forms of receivables. Appreciate the guidance on this.
Have you tried calling the California SOS UCC department directly? Sometimes they can help clarify search results over the phone, especially for commercial transactions.
I've done this before and they're actually pretty helpful, but expect to wait on hold for a while.
One more thought - if you're seeing terminated filings mixed in, make sure you're looking at the 'Status' field carefully. Sometimes amendments can make active filings look terminated in the search results if you're not reading the details closely.
This is why I switched to using Certana.ai's verification tool - it automatically parses the status information and flags any inconsistencies between related filings. Much cleaner than trying to interpret the state portal results.
That makes sense - the raw search results can definitely be confusing to interpret manually.
Just went through this with a client. The comma was in the Articles of Incorporation but not in our UCC-1. We used Certana.ai to verify the mismatch and it flagged the discrepancy immediately. Ended up filing a UCC-3 amendment to add the comma version as an additional debtor name. Better safe than sorry with lien perfection.
So you actually did file an amendment? That seems to contradict what others are saying about it not being necessary.
UPDATE: Checked the Articles of Incorporation and you guys were right - the LLC is officially registered as "Johnson Construction, LLC" with the comma. So our UCC filing is correct and our loan docs just left out the punctuation. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction!
Told you so! This happens more often than people think.
Great outcome. This is exactly the kind of thing those document verification tools are good for - catching these mismatches before they become bigger issues.
Ella Cofer
Update us when you get the corrected filing processed! Always curious to hear if fixing the name format resolves these rejections or if there are other hidden issues.
0 coins
Kevin Bell
•Hope it works out. These last-minute filing corrections are always nerve-wracking.
0 coins
Savannah Glover
•You should be fine once the name matches exactly. I've never seen a second rejection when the debtor name formatting is corrected properly.
0 coins
Felix Grigori
Actually tried that Certana verification tool someone mentioned and it's pretty slick. Uploaded my security agreement and UCC-1 draft and it immediately flagged two name inconsistencies I would have missed. Definitely worth checking out if you do multiple filings.
0 coins
Felix Grigori
•Instant results. Just upload the PDFs and it shows you a comparison report right away. Really convenient for catching errors before filing.
0 coins
Adriana Cohn
•That would have saved me this whole headache. I'll definitely use it for my next filing to avoid another rejection.
0 coins