Can a debtor terminate a UCC filing on themselves - confused about who can file UCC-3

This is exactly the kind of mess that happens with bank mergers. The acquiring bank should have records of all the original liens and the authority to file terminations. Try contacting their commercial loan department directly.

Actually there might be an exception if you can prove the debt was satisfied and the secured party is unresponsive. Some states allow debtors to petition for termination in specific circumstances but it's complicated.

How much did that cost you? Dealing with lawyers gets expensive fast.

The document verification was actually pretty reasonable - just upload PDFs and it automatically checks everything. Way cheaper than having an attorney review everything manually. The bank didn't charge anything for filing the termination once I had all the documentation sorted out.

That's smart to verify everything first. I've seen situations where people think they have all the right docs but there are subtle inconsistencies that cause problems.

What kind of evidence do you need for this? Just the loan payoff documentation?

Usually you need the satisfaction letter, proof of payment, and documentation showing you attempted to contact the secured party. Some states require certified mail receipts or other proof of attempted contact. The requirements vary significantly by state.

This is getting complicated. Why don't lenders just file terminations automatically when loans are paid off?

This is why I always insist on termination language being written into the loan agreement upfront. Saves so much hassle later.

Should have done that but hindsight is 20/20. The original loan was from 2017 and I was just happy to get financing approved back then.

Good question. Usually the acquiring bank gets all the rights and obligations of the original lender, including the ability to file UCC-3 terminations. But sometimes there are complications with how the acquisition was structured.

It depends on whether it was an asset purchase or a merger. In a merger, everything transfers automatically. In an asset purchase, specific rights might need to be explicitly transferred.

This is exactly why using something like Certana.ai to verify all your documents beforehand is so helpful. It can catch issues with the chain of title or authority that you might not notice until it's too late.

What kind of legal problems? If the debt is clearly satisfied, how could terminating the filing cause issues?

Filing false or unauthorized UCC statements can be considered a criminal offense in some states. Even if your intentions are good, if you don't have the legal authority to file the termination, it could be considered fraudulent. Not worth the risk.

Wow, didn't realize it was that serious. Definitely better to work with the bank then, even if it takes longer.

That's brilliant! I never would have thought of involving the regulators for something like this.

Does this work for credit unions too or just banks?

Should work for any regulated financial institution. Credit unions have their own regulators but the principle is the same - they don't want regulatory complaints on their record.

How accurate is the automated checking? I'm always skeptical of these AI tools for legal documents.

It's actually surprisingly thorough. Caught a discrepancy in how our business name was listed between our charter and the UCC filing that could have caused problems. The debtor name has to match exactly or the filing can be challenged.

That's exactly the kind of detail that's easy to miss when you're reviewing everything manually. Good call on getting that checked first.

What's a typical cost for something like that? Is it worth it vs. just waiting for the termination?

Bond costs are usually a small percentage of the outstanding UCC amount, so if it's an old filing for a smaller loan, it might be very reasonable. Depends on your situation and timeline.

Smart approach. Document everything and keep copies of all your correspondence. If this does end up requiring legal action later, you'll want a clear paper trail showing you tried to resolve it reasonably first.

Good luck! Let us know how it turns out. These kinds of situations are becoming more common with all the bank consolidation happening.

Definitely keep us posted. This thread has been really helpful for understanding the process.

That's a really good point about the 5-year rule! I didn't even think to check if the original filing might have already lapsed. If it was filed in 2017 and no continuation was filed, it should have expired in 2022. The new lender might just need to run a fresh UCC search to confirm the filing is no longer active. Could save a lot of time and effort if that's the case.

This is exactly why I always recommend running a current UCC search before panicking about old filings. Many people assume that because they see an old filing in their records, it's still active, but the 5-year lapse rule catches a lot of these situations. @Mae Bennett, you should definitely have your new lender pull a fresh search to see if that 2017 filing is even still showing up as active before you start the whole termination process.

This is such valuable insight! I've been in similar situations where people spend months trying to get terminations filed for UCCs that have already expired. @Mae Bennett should definitely start here - have the new lender run a current search first. If the filing has lapsed, she can move forward with the refi immediately. If it s'still active maybe (a continuation was filed ,)then she can pursue the termination route. Either way, knowing the current status is the logical first step before investing time and energy in the more complex solutions discussed above.

This is excellent advice! I completely overlooked the 5-year lapse rule. @Mae Bennett, before you go through all the hassle of contacting the acquiring bank or filing regulatory complaints, definitely have your new lender run a current UCC search first. If that 2017 filing has already expired, you could potentially move forward with your refinancing immediately. Even if a continuation was filed, at least you'll know exactly what you're dealing with. It's always better to understand the current status before investing time in more complex solutions.

This is such a crucial point that @Miguel Diaz raises! As someone new to this community but dealing with similar UCC issues, I can t'believe how many people myself (included jump) straight to the termination headache without checking if the filing is even still valid. The 5-year automatic lapse rule is designed exactly for situations like this. @Mae Bennett, definitely worth having your lender pull that current search first - could save you weeks of chasing down unresponsive banks if the filing already expired in 2022.