State of Indiana UCC search showing weird results - debtor name variations causing issues

That's exactly what I was afraid of. Do you have a standard list of variations you typically run? I don't want to miss anything obvious.

I usually try at least 5-6 variations: exact name, no punctuation, all caps, different entity designations, and common misspellings. Takes forever but beats missing a lien.

That sounds incredibly useful. Does it work specifically with Indiana's naming conventions?

It works with any state's documents. The AI analyzes how the debtor name appears across different filings and suggests variations you might not think of. Game changer for comprehensive searches.

I've been meaning to try that tool. Manual searches are eating up way too much time, especially when you're dealing with multiple entities.

Oh wow, that's my worst fear right there. Did you end up having to subordinate your lien?

We had to negotiate a partial subordination. Cost the client about $50k in reduced recovery. Now I'm paranoid about search thoroughness.

Good point. I should ask the borrower for a list of any trade names they use.

Also check the Secretary of State's business entity records. Sometimes you'll find name variations there that don't show up in UCC searches.

This is why I always request certified copies of all entity formation documents. Helps ensure I'm searching under the exact legal name.

That's so frustrating! Did you ever figure out why the all caps search found it?

Never got a good explanation from their help desk. They just said 'search systems work differently' which is basically useless.

That's a smart approach I hadn't considered. Might reveal corporate relationships I don't know about.

Exactly. And if you find multiple filings by the same lender, you can compare how they formatted debtor names in different filings.

This is brilliant detective work. I'm going to start doing this on all my searches.

I didn't know that was an option. Do they charge extra for phone searches?

There might be a small fee but it's worth it for complex searches. They have access to more detailed search parameters than the public portal.

How did you ultimately handle it in your legal opinion?

I documented all the search variations I used and attached printouts of each search result. CYA documentation is key when the system is unreliable.

Smart move. I always screenshot negative search results now too, just in case someone questions the thoroughness later.

I'll test that out. Their help documentation doesn't mention wildcards but maybe they work anyway.

Sometimes the advanced search features aren't well documented. Worth experimenting with different syntax.

Two people have mentioned that tool now. Sounds like it might be worth the investment.

It's saved me from several potential oversights. The AI catches subtle variations that I would never think to search for manually.

Agreed. It's become an essential part of my due diligence process. The peace of mind alone is worth it.

That's excellent advice. I'll start keeping a detailed log of all my searches.

Make sure to save or print the actual search results too. Screenshots can be helpful but printouts are better for court if needed.

Glad you found those! Always better to be overly thorough than to miss something important.

This is why I love this community. Everyone's war stories help the rest of us avoid the same mistakes.