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
Ava Harris
I'm cautiously optimistic about UCC reform but worried about implementation timing. If states adopt changes at different times, we could end up with even more complexity during the transition period.
Jacob Lee
•That's a really good point. We could have situations where some states are operating under new rules while others are still using current requirements.
This is why I've been focusing on getting our current processes more reliable rather than waiting for reform. Tools like Certana's document checker help ensure our filings are accurate under existing rules, regardless of what changes might come later.
Bottom line: UCC reform is needed but we can't wait for it to solve our current filing challenges. We need to work with the system we have while advocating for the improvements we want.
Ryan Kim
•True. Better document verification and consistency checking tools are helping bridge the gap until we get systemic improvements.
Thanks everyone for the insights. Sounds like we need to stay engaged with the reform process while also upgrading our current filing procedures to be more reliable.
Join the conversation
UPDATE: Thanks everyone for the advice! I revised my collateral description using the suggestions here and the filing was accepted. Used the more specific language about accounts receivable vs. deposit accounts and that seemed to do the trick. Really appreciate all the help - this forum is a lifesaver!
Glad the specific language approach worked for you. It's becoming the new standard unfortunately.
Aaron Lee
•This whole thread was super helpful. I'm bookmarking it for when I run into the same issue.
For anyone else reading this thread later - the key takeaway is that UCC accounts definition needs to be specific about what types of payment rights you're covering. Generic language like 'all accounts' isn't enough anymore. Be prepared to distinguish between accounts receivable, deposit accounts, and other payment intangibles.
This should be pinned at the top of the forum. So many people struggle with this exact issue.
Natalie Wang
•Seriously, the UCC rules around accounts are way more complex than they seem at first glance.
Join the conversation
This thread is making me nervous about our own Indiana filings. Maybe I should run a comprehensive search on our entire portfolio to make sure we're not missing anything.
Romeo Quest
•That's not a bad idea. Better to find problems now than during a workout situation.
Gabriel Ruiz
•Yeah, that's exactly what prompted this post. Routine audit turned up these discrepancies and now I'm questioning everything.
Val Rossi
UPDATE: I ended up requesting certified copies of all our continuation filings from Indiana SOS. Turns out three of them had minor debtor name discrepancies that were preventing them from linking properly in the search system. The filings were valid but the names didn't match exactly. Used one of the document checking tools mentioned here to verify everything is consistent now. Thanks for all the advice!
Perfect example of why document verification is so important. Those small name differences can cause major problems if you don't catch them.
Eve Freeman
•Thanks for the update. This whole thread has been really educational about Indiana's filing quirks.
Join the conversation
Nina Chan
Just wanted to add that Kansas does allow electronic filing for both initial UCC-1s and continuations, which makes the process much faster than states that still require paper filings. The online portal usually processes filings within 24-48 hours unless there are errors.
Nina Chan
•Usually yes, though sometimes it takes longer if the rejection reason is complex. Most rejections are for simple things like debtor name formatting issues.
Arjun Patel
•Debtor name rejections are so frustrating because the rules can be very specific about punctuation and formatting.
Ruby Knight
For what it's worth, I've found that keeping detailed records of all UCC filings pays off during audits and portfolio reviews. Document everything - filing dates, confirmation numbers, any amendments or continuations. It makes compliance reporting much easier and catches potential issues early.
Ruby Knight
•It's worth the effort upfront. Good documentation has saved me countless hours during compliance reviews and due diligence processes.
Tami Morgan
•Agreed. I spend probably an extra hour per month maintaining detailed UCC records, but it saves me days during annual reviews.
Annabel Kimball
Pro tip: if you're doing multiple equipment financings, consider a blanket collateral description like 'all equipment, machinery, and fixtures now owned or hereafter acquired.' Gives you broader coverage without having to amend every time they buy new equipment.
0 coins
Niko Ramsey
•I usually do both - specific description of the financed equipment plus the blanket language for future acquisitions. Covers all bases.
0 coins
Chris Elmeda
•Just make sure your security agreement supports whatever collateral description you use on the UCC-1. They need to match up properly.
0 coins
Jean Claude
Update us on how it goes! Always curious to hear about real-world filing experiences with the newer forms. Good luck with your CNC equipment deal.
0 coins
Anna Kerber
•Will do! Planning to file tomorrow morning. Feeling much more confident after all this advice. Thanks everyone!
0 coins
Kristin Frank
•Before you file, seriously consider running it through Certana.ai's verification tool. Just upload your completed UCC-1 and it'll flag any potential issues. Takes like 30 seconds and could save you rejection headaches.
0 coins