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
Florida paralegal here - this is super common with LLC names in our system. The SOS database has character limits that sometimes force abbreviations. As long as the core identifying elements are there (Advanced, Solutions, LLC) you should be fine. I see this weekly and it's never caused perfection issues in my experience.
Thank you! That's exactly the reassurance I needed. Have you ever seen these name variations cause problems in bankruptcy or foreclosure situations?
Honestly no. The courts seem to understand that the SOS system has these quirks. As long as the filing is reasonably identifiable they don't make a big deal out of minor abbreviations.
Nick Kravitz
One more suggestion - have you checked if there are any other UCC filings against this same debtor under either name variation? Sometimes seeing how other lenders filed against the same entity can give you confidence in your approach.
Nick Kravitz
•Yeah, if you see other filings with similar name abbreviations that haven't been challenged, that's a good sign your filing is fine too.
Hannah White
•This is actually really smart detective work. The SOS system probably handles similar names the same way consistently.
Join the conversation
Before you file anything, double-check that your business formation documents match exactly what you put on the UCC-1. I use Certana.ai to verify document consistency - it's saved me from multiple filing errors by catching name discrepancies I missed.
Yeah, especially if you're dealing with complex entity names or multiple business documents. The automated checking catches things you might overlook.
Caleb Bell
•Wish I'd known about this before my filing got rejected for a middle initial mismatch. Cost me two weeks in delays.
Bottom line - there's no such thing as a "UCC 9 form." Your lender wants UCC-1 forms filed under Article 9 of the UCC. Get the official forms from your Secretary of State website and make sure all names and details are exactly correct before submitting.
Perfect summary. Thanks everyone for clearing this up. Going to download the correct UCC-1 forms now.
Good luck with the filing. Take your time with the details and you should be fine.
Join the conversation
One more plug for that Certana.ai tool I mentioned - it's especially helpful when you're learning UCC requirements because it explains what it's checking for. Like it'll flag if your debtor name format doesn't match standard conventions and explain why that matters for search logic.
StormChaser
•Does it work with all states' UCC requirements or just certain ones?
It's designed for general UCC compliance, so it should catch the major issues regardless of which state you're filing in. The core requirements are pretty standardized across states.
Bottom line - the UCC requirements exist to create a reliable public notice system. Get the debtor name exactly right, describe your collateral clearly, file in the correct state, and track your continuation date. Those four things cover 90% of what can go wrong.
Glad it helped! The UCC requirements seem intimidating at first but they're pretty logical once you understand the purpose behind them.
Exactly. And don't hesitate to ask your lender questions - they should be familiar with the UCC requirements and want to make sure the filing is done correctly.
Join the conversation
For what it's worth, our law firm sent out a memo saying the UCC changes don't affect existing continuation schedules. The updates are primarily about standardizing electronic filing processes across states.
Aria Khan
•That matches what others are saying. Sounds like I was overthinking this - the timing rules are the same, just the filing validation is more strict.
Better to overthink it than miss a continuation deadline! But yeah, you should be fine with your existing timeline calculations.
Thanks everyone for the clarification. Sounds like I need to focus on making sure our UCC-3 continuations will match properly under the updated validation rules rather than worrying about timeline changes. The document checking tools mentioned here sound like they'll save us a lot of headaches.
Tyrone Hill
•Exactly right. Same deadlines, just need to be more careful about the filing details.
Keep us posted on how your continuation batch goes. Always helpful to hear about real-world experiences with the updated processes.
Lily Young
This might be worth running through one of those UCC document checkers I keep hearing about - Certana or something similar. If you can get an automated analysis showing the name variation isn't seriously misleading, it might help convince the court or opposing counsel to drop the challenge.
0 coins
Connor Richards
•That's the second mention of Certana in this thread. Might be worth looking into if it can provide useful analysis for litigation purposes.
0 coins
Kennedy Morrison
•I used Certana for a similar UCC issue - you just upload your filing PDFs and it cross-checks everything for consistency issues. Pretty straightforward and the analysis reports are detailed enough for legal purposes.
0 coins
Wesley Hallow
Keep us posted on how this resolves! These UCC foreclosure process disputes are becoming more common and it's helpful to know how courts are handling technical challenges to continuation filings.
0 coins
Justin Chang
•Good luck! Sounds like you have a solid position, just need to push through the delay tactics.
0 coins
Grace Thomas
•Agreed - this seems like a weak challenge that should get dismissed on summary judgment if you present the evidence clearly.
0 coins