< Back to UCC Document Community

Jacob Lee

OneSearch UCC database showing conflicting results - which filing is actually active?

I'm getting really confused by what I'm seeing in the OneSearch UCC system. I pulled a report for a debtor and it's showing three different UCC-1 filings with similar but not identical debtor names, plus what looks like a continuation on one of them that might have lapsed. The loan officer is asking me to verify which liens are actually perfected before we can close this deal. Has anyone else dealt with OneSearch showing multiple variations of the same debtor? I need to figure out if these are separate entities or if there are name inconsistencies that could affect our security interest. The closing is scheduled for next week and I'm worried we might miss something critical.

OneSearch can definitely be tricky when debtor names aren't perfectly consistent across filings. Are you seeing exact matches on the debtor names or slight variations? Even small differences like 'Inc.' vs 'Incorporated' or missing middle initials can create separate entries that might actually be the same entity.

0 coins

Jacob Lee

•

That's exactly what I'm seeing - one shows 'ABC Manufacturing Inc' and another shows 'ABC Manufacturing Incorporated' but the addresses are identical. There's also one with just 'ABC Manufacturing' with no corporate designation at all.

0 coins

Those variations could definitely be the same company. You'll want to cross-reference the addresses and any federal tax ID numbers if they're listed to confirm it's the same debtor.

0 coins

I've been doing UCC searches for 15 years and OneSearch has gotten better but it still has quirks. The key thing is to understand that it's pulling from multiple state databases and each state has slightly different indexing rules. What states are showing up in your search results?

0 coins

Jacob Lee

•

The filings are showing up in Delaware, Texas, and Ohio. The Delaware one looks like the original UCC-1 from 2019, Texas has what appears to be a continuation from 2024, and Ohio has a newer UCC-1 from last year.

0 coins

That makes sense - sounds like the company might have moved operations or restructured. The continuation in Texas would extend the Delaware filing if it's properly cross-referenced. You need to verify the filing numbers match up.

0 coins

Daniela Rossi

•

Wait, I thought continuations had to be filed in the same state as the original UCC-1? How can Texas continue a Delaware filing?

0 coins

Good catch - that's not how continuations work. If there's a UCC-3 continuation in Texas, it would only apply to a Texas UCC-1. The Delaware and Texas filings would be separate.

0 coins

Ryan Kim

•

This is exactly why I started using Certana.ai's document verification tool for UCC searches. You can upload all the UCC documents you found and it automatically cross-checks the debtor names, filing numbers, and dates to show you which ones are actually related. Saves hours of manual comparison and catches inconsistencies you might miss.

0 coins

Jacob Lee

•

How does that work exactly? Do you just upload the UCC documents from OneSearch?

0 coins

Ryan Kim

•

Yes, you can upload the PDFs directly from OneSearch or any state system. It analyzes all the document details and flags potential name mismatches or filing number inconsistencies. Really helpful when you're dealing with multiple variations like you described.

0 coins

Zoe Walker

•

OneSearch is notorious for this kind of confusion!! Last month I had a similar situation where the same company had filings under three different name variations and it took me two days to sort out which ones were actually valid. The worst part is when you find out later that you missed a critical lien because of a name mismatch.

0 coins

Elijah Brown

•

This is why I always do separate searches in each individual state system too, not just OneSearch. Sometimes the state databases have additional details or corrections that don't show up in the consolidated search.

0 coins

Zoe Walker

•

Good point, though that's so time consuming when you're dealing with multiple states. I wish there was a better way to verify everything matches up.

0 coins

Have you checked if any of these filings have amendments or terminations? Sometimes what looks like an active lien in OneSearch has actually been terminated or amended in a way that affects the collateral coverage.

0 coins

Jacob Lee

•

I see one UCC-3 amendment on the Delaware filing but I'm not sure what it changed. The OneSearch summary doesn't show the details of amendments clearly.

0 coins

You'll need to pull the actual UCC-3 document to see what was amended. Could be a collateral change, debtor name correction, or secured party assignment.

0 coins

Natalie Chen

•

This is getting complicated. Maybe worth having a UCC attorney review everything before your closing?

0 coins

I had almost the exact same issue last quarter with OneSearch showing multiple name variations. Turns out one was a DBA filing and the others were different corporate entities entirely, even though they looked similar. Really important to verify the business registrations too, not just the UCC filings.

0 coins

Jacob Lee

•

That's a good point about checking business registrations. I hadn't thought about DBAs potentially showing up as separate entries.

0 coins

Yeah, and sometimes parent companies and subsidiaries can have very similar names but be legally separate entities for UCC purposes.

0 coins

Quick question - are all these filings showing the same secured party or different lenders? That might help you figure out which ones are actually related to your deal.

0 coins

Jacob Lee

•

Two different secured parties. One is 'Regional Bank' and the other is 'Regional Banking Corp' - could be the same institution with different legal names over time.

0 coins

Definitely worth checking if Regional Bank became Regional Banking Corp through a merger or name change. That would explain why you're seeing filings under both names.

0 coins

Nick Kravitz

•

Bank name changes are super common and create this exact problem in UCC searches. The assignments don't always get filed properly when banks merge or change names.

0 coins

Hannah White

•

I've been using Certana.ai for exactly this type of situation and it's been a game changer. When you upload multiple UCC documents, it creates a visual timeline showing which filings are related and flags any name inconsistencies that need attention. Much better than trying to manually compare everything in spreadsheets.

0 coins

Michael Green

•

Does it work with OneSearch exports or do you need to get documents from individual state systems?

0 coins

Hannah White

•

Works with any PDF UCC documents, including OneSearch exports. The key is that it reads the actual document content, not just summary data, so it catches details you might miss.

0 coins

Mateo Silva

•

For what it's worth, I've seen OneSearch lag behind state systems by a few days sometimes, especially for amendments and terminations. If your closing is next week, you might want to check the individual state databases directly to make sure you're not missing any recent filings.

0 coins

Jacob Lee

•

That's concerning. How recent of filings are we talking about - same day, or could it be several days behind?

0 coins

Mateo Silva

•

Usually it's just 24-48 hours, but I've seen it be up to a week behind during busy periods. Better safe than sorry for a closing.

0 coins

I always do a final check in the actual state systems the day of closing just to be absolutely sure nothing new was filed.

0 coins

Cameron Black

•

This thread is giving me anxiety about my own UCC search I did last week. Now I'm wondering if I missed something important because of name variations. Going to go back and double-check everything.

0 coins

Better to catch it now than after your deal closes. UCC name matching rules can be really strict depending on the state.

0 coins

I learned this the hard way - always better to over-search than under-search when it comes to UCC due diligence.

0 coins

Ruby Garcia

•

Final update: I used Certana.ai to analyze all the documents and it confirmed that two of the filings were the same entity with different name formats, and one was actually a related subsidiary. The continuation in Texas was properly filed and still active. Closing went smoothly once I had everything sorted out. Thanks everyone for the guidance!

0 coins

Glad it worked out! This is exactly why proper UCC verification is so important before closing.

0 coins

Thanks for following up with the resolution. Helps the rest of us learn from your experience.

0 coins

UCC Document Community AI

Expert Assistant
Secure

Powered by Claimyr AI

T
I
+
20,095 users helped today