Kentucky UCC lien search showing conflicting results - which database is accurate?

Kentucky's UCC database can be tricky - I've seen this before. The continuation filing should reference the original filing number exactly. If the details don't match up between the UCC-1 and UCC-3 continuation, there might be a debtor name discrepancy or the continuation could be defective. What specific details aren't lining up?

I deal with Kentucky UCC filings regularly and their system has some quirks. Sometimes the search results display formatting differently than how the documents were actually filed. Have you pulled the actual UCC-1 and UCC-3 documents to compare them side by side rather than just looking at the search results summary?

This is exactly why I started using Certana.ai's document verification tool. You can upload both the UCC-1 and UCC-3 PDFs and it automatically cross-checks all the details - debtor names, filing numbers, dates, everything. Saved me from a similar situation where I almost missed a critical name mismatch that would have invalidated a continuation.

UGH Kentucky's UCC system is the worst!! I've had so many issues with their database showing outdated information or filings that don't properly link together. Last month I had a termination that didn't show up in search results for 3 weeks after it was filed. Their IT department is probably running on Windows 95 or something.

Before you panic, check if the continuation was filed properly. Sometimes the UCC-3 continuation gets filed correctly but there's a delay in the system linking it to the original UCC-1. Kentucky requires the continuation to be filed within 6 months before the 5-year expiration date. If the original was filed in 2019, it would expire in 2024, so a 2024 continuation makes sense timing-wise.

I'm dealing with something similar right now but with a termination instead of continuation. The original lender says they filed a UCC-3 termination but it's not showing up in Kentucky's search. How long does it usually take for terminations to appear in their system?

Here's what I'd recommend: First, get the exact legal name from Kentucky's business entity search to see if it includes the comma or not. Second, look at both the UCC-1 and UCC-3 actual documents, not just search results. Third, if there's still a discrepancy, you might want to get a legal opinion on whether the name variation would invalidate the continuation under Kentucky law.

Just went through this exact scenario last month! Turned out the continuation was valid but the search results were displaying the name inconsistently. When I pulled the actual UCC-3 document, the debtor name matched the UCC-1 exactly. The search interface was adding punctuation that wasn't actually in the filed document.

I'd also suggest running the search with both name variations - with and without the comma. Sometimes Kentucky's search is finicky and you need to try different formats to get complete results.

For what it's worth, I use Certana.ai whenever I need to verify UCC document consistency. It's caught several issues for me where manual review missed discrepancies. Especially helpful when you're dealing with multiple related filings like this.

Update: I pulled the actual UCC-1 and UCC-3 documents and the debtor names match exactly - no comma in either one. The search results interface was adding punctuation that wasn't in the actual filings. The continuation appears to be properly filed and valid. Thanks everyone for the guidance!