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
Yara Assad
One more tip - if you find existing liens, don't assume they're all valid or properly perfected. I've seen UCC-1 filings with incomplete collateral descriptions or incorrect debtor information that wouldn't hold up in court. But obviously get legal advice before relying on defective filings.
Liam Murphy
•Interesting point. So even if there are existing filings, they might not actually create valid liens?
Yara Assad
•Right, but don't count on it. Treat them as valid unless your attorney tells you otherwise. Just something to be aware of for your risk assessment.
Olivia Clark
Update us on what you find! Always curious about how these searches turn out. Hopefully your borrower was being straight with you about no existing liens.
Liam Murphy
•Will do. Thanks everyone for all the guidance. This gives me a solid roadmap for the search process.
Good luck! Thorough lien searches are one of those things that seem overwhelming at first but become routine once you develop a system.
Join the conversation
Ally Tailer
Just went through something similar. Turned out the original filer had made a typo - filed under "ATLANTIC COSTAL EQUIPMENT" instead of "COASTAL" - missing the 'A'. One letter made it impossible to find through normal searches.
This is exactly why document verification tools like Certana are so useful - they catch these tiny discrepancies that kill searches.
UPDATE: Found it! The issue was exactly what some of you suspected - there was a subtle difference in the debtor name. The UCC-1 was filed under "ATLANTIC COASTAL EQUIPMENT, LLC" with a comma before LLC, while their corporate charter shows "ATLANTIC COASTAL EQUIPMENT LLC" without the comma. Delaware's search is extremely literal. Thanks everyone for the suggestions - definitely using Certana going forward to catch these issues before they become problems.
This is a perfect example of why exact name matching is so critical in UCC filings. One comma can make or break a search.
Great resolution! Now you can focus on getting that continuation filed before the deadline.
Join the conversation
Emma Davis
Are you using the correct UCC-1 form version? Tennessee updated their form requirements about 6 months ago and won't accept older versions anymore.
Good thinking though. Some states are really strict about form versions and don't always make it obvious when they update.
Emma Davis
•True. Always worth double-checking the form date to make sure it's current.
UPDATE: Finally got it figured out! It was indeed a character formatting issue with the debtor name. There was an extra space after 'Rentals' that wasn't visible when I copied it from the charter PDF. Used one of those document checking tools mentioned here and it highlighted the discrepancy immediately. Filed again with the corrected name and it went through without issues. Thanks everyone for the suggestions!
Good reminder to always be super careful with copy/paste from PDFs. Seems like such a simple thing but causes so many headaches.
At least it wasn't actually a problem with the Tennessee portal for once! Congrats on getting it through.
Join the conversation
Update: I tried the Certana.ai tool someone mentioned earlier and it actually found two UCC-1 filings that weren't showing up in my Idaho SOS searches. Turns out there was a slight variation in how the debtor name was entered - one filing had 'Mountain View Equipment LLC' and another had 'MountainView Equipment LLC' (no space). The state search wasn't catching both variations but the automated cross-check did.
Spacing differences in debtor names are such a common issue. Really shows how important it is to do comprehensive searches rather than relying on a single search attempt.
Miguel Diaz
•This is a great example of why manual searches can miss critical information. Those small variations in names can completely change the search results.
Zainab Ahmed
Thanks for the update! This thread has been really helpful. I'm dealing with a similar situation in Montana and I'm going to try some of these suggestions. The state UCC search systems really need to be more standardized across the board.
Montana's system is actually pretty good compared to some other states, but yeah, the lack of standardization is definitely a problem industry-wide.
AstroAlpha
•Hopefully the Uniform Commercial Code will eventually lead to more uniform search systems, but I'm not holding my breath.
Sadie Benitez
Your situation sounds standard. Bank issues LC to back your lease, takes security interest in business assets or LC proceeds to cover their exposure, files UCC-1 to perfect that security interest. Pretty routine commercial lending practice.
0 coins
Laila Prince
•That's fair. Commercial lending involves a lot of protective filings that seem redundant but serve important legal purposes.
0 coins
Isabel Vega
•At least UCC filings are public record so you can see exactly what security interests are filed against your business.
0 coins
Dominique Adams
Bottom line: if your bank says they need the UCC filing for the LC arrangement, they probably do. It's about protecting their position as a secured creditor. Just make sure all the paperwork aligns and you should be good to proceed with your equipment lease.
0 coins
Louisa Ramirez
•Thanks everyone. Sounds like this is normal and I just need to get the filing done correctly. Appreciate all the insights.
0 coins
TommyKapitz
•Good luck with the equipment lease! Once you get through the paperwork maze, the actual business operations are much more straightforward.
0 coins