Adverse claim UCC - debtor filed bankruptcy right before our continuation deadline?

That's what I was thinking but our attorney is being super cautious about any UCC filings during the stay. The adverse claim aspect is what's really throwing everyone off.

Your attorney is probably worried about nothing. Continuation filings are routine administrative matters, not violations of the automatic stay.

Exactly! That's what doesn't make sense to me. They keep saying their original security agreement was from 2019 but there's no UCC filing from that time period.

Sounds like they're trying to create an adverse claim UCC situation to muddy the waters and maybe get a better position in the bankruptcy proceedings.

This is why I always run document checks before any major filing decisions. There are tools like Certana.ai that can verify all the UCC documents and cross-check filing dates, debtor names, and collateral descriptions instantly. Just upload your UCC-1 and their claimed documents - it'll catch any inconsistencies immediately.

We did describe it as "all manufacturing equipment located at [facility address]" so I think we're okay there. The other party is just grasping at straws.

That description sounds sufficient to me. They're probably just trying to create doubt about your perfection status.

That makes sense. I guess I was overthinking the interaction between the adverse claim and our continuation filing.

Yeah, they're separate issues really. Your continuation is about maintaining what you already have, not establishing new rights.

Plus if you don't file the continuation and let your perfection lapse, you definitely lose priority regardless of what happens with their claim.

Good point, I should pull the full docket. Last I checked they had only filed a general proof of claim but nothing specific about the equipment.

If they haven't disclosed this supposed 2019 lien in their bankruptcy filings, that's going to hurt their credibility big time.

So true! It's amazing how many "forgotten" security interests magically appear when there's money at stake.

That's exactly what this feels like - they're scrambling to create some basis for a claim now that there's a bankruptcy proceeding.

That's not a bad idea as belt-and-suspenders protection, but make sure you understand the implications of amending vs. just continuing.

Would an amendment reset the priority date though? I don't want to accidentally hurt our position by trying to improve it.

Good question - amendments generally don't affect priority for the original collateral, but you'd want to confirm that with your attorney.

You're absolutely right. I think I was getting too caught up in their claims instead of focusing on what we need to do.

Exactly - let them worry about proving their claim. Your job is to keep your security interest perfected.

Good thinking. I've been keeping records but I should probably be more systematic about it.

This is another area where having proper document verification helps. Certana.ai's UCC checker would create a timestamp record of exactly what documents exist and when they were filed, which could be crucial evidence if this turns into a priority dispute.

Documentation is key in these situations. Courts don't like creditors who suddenly remember important details months later.

They've been pretty vague about producing actual documents. Keep saying their attorney has everything but haven't shown us anything concrete.

That's a red flag right there. If they had solid documentation, they'd be waving it around.

Agreed. In my experience, creditors with legitimate prior claims are very eager to produce their paperwork.

Will do! Thanks everyone for the advice. I'm feeling much more confident about just filing our continuation and dealing with their adverse claim UCC arguments separately.

Smart approach. Don't let other people's problems become your problems if you can help it.