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
QuantumQuest
West Virginia has some weird rules about fixture filings too if your equipment is going to be attached to real estate. Make sure you're not missing a fixture filing requirement that could affect your priority.
QuantumQuest
•Mobile equipment can still have fixture issues if it gets attached to customer facilities. Just something to keep in mind during the loan monitoring phase.
This is why we always include language in our security agreements about notification if equipment becomes fixtures. Covers you if the debtor moves equipment to real estate later.
Update us when you figure out what was causing the search issues! Always helpful to know what worked for future WV filings.
Will do. Going to try the name variations suggested here and probably order certified results to be safe.
Smart approach. Better to over-search than miss something that could affect your lien priority.
Join the conversation
Lauren Wood
Just went through this exact process last month with equipment financing. The Texas SOS online filing system is pretty user-friendly once you have all your details straight. Takes about 10 minutes to complete the UCC-1 if you have everything ready.
Lauren Wood
•The hard part is getting the document details right beforehand. The actual filing is straightforward.
Ellie Lopez
•Texas charges $15 for electronic UCC-1 filings, pretty reasonable compared to some states.
One more thing about free templates - make sure they include proper default and enforcement provisions. You want clear language about what happens if the borrower doesn't pay and how you can recover the collateral.
That's wise. Even if the UCC filing is perfect, weak enforcement language in the security agreement can create problems down the road.
Self-help repossession rules vary by state too, so definitely get local legal advice on the enforcement provisions.
Join the conversation
This thread is making me realize I probably need to be more systematic about my search process. I've been pretty casual about name variations but sounds like that's risky business.
Beth Ford
•Better to be overly cautious than miss something important. The extra time spent on thorough searches is worth it to avoid problems later.
Agreed. I'd rather spend an extra 30 minutes being thorough than have a deal blow up because we missed a lien.
Thanks everyone for the advice. Sounds like the consensus is to run multiple search variations and maybe look into some of these verification tools. Iowa's system clearly isn't going to get better anytime soon so we need to adapt our processes.
Joy Olmedo
•That's the right approach. Document your search methodology too so you can show you did due diligence if questions come up later.
Isaiah Cross
•Good point about documentation. Save screenshots of all your search results with timestamps.
Join the conversation
Actually used Certana.ai recently when I had questions about whether our security agreements met attachment requirements. Uploaded the docs and it flagged that one agreement was missing a proper collateral description. Saved us from having an unenforceable security interest.
Amara Torres
•Interesting - so it can catch issues with the agreement authentication prong of attachment too?
Yeah, it checks all the attachment elements when you upload security agreements. Really thorough analysis of what's present and what might be missing.
One thing that confused me was whether 'value' meant the loan amount or just any consideration. Turns out it's pretty broad - can be a binding commitment to extend credit, even if no money has actually been advanced yet.
Good to know. So it's not just cash changing hands but any legally sufficient consideration.
Amara Torres
•This helps too - I was thinking value had to be the actual loan proceeds, but it sounds like it's more flexible than that.
Aisha Hussain
The UCC definition of material really comes down to providing enough information for a searcher to reasonably identify what collateral is covered without being so specific that you exclude items. Think of it from a searcher's perspective - if they were looking for liens on manufacturing equipment, would your description give them enough material information to understand what's covered? That's the test most filing offices seem to apply.
0 coins
Oliver Fischer
•That's a great way to think about it - from the searcher's perspective. Makes the material definition requirement much clearer.
0 coins
Ethan Clark
•Exactly right. The whole point of the material information requirement is to help searchers understand what they're looking at. Good framework for evaluating descriptions.
0 coins
StarStrider
Just wanted to add that timing matters too with these rejections. If you're close to a loan closing deadline, consider filing a broader description first to get something on record, then file a UCC-3 amendment with more specific material details once you have time to get it right. At least you'll have priority from the initial filing date.
0 coins
Oliver Fischer
•Smart strategy for deadline pressure situations. Better to have something filed than miss the closing because of description disputes.
0 coins
Yuki Sato
•This is good tactical advice. We've done this when facing tight deadlines - get the priority date secured then perfect the material details later.
0 coins