UCC 1-308 reservation of rights - does this affect secured lender documentation?
Been working on some equipment financing deals lately and keep running into borrowers who want to add "UCC 1-308 reservation of rights" language to their loan documents or even try to include it on UCC-1 filings. One guy actually tried to handwrite it on his signature page before notarization. I'm not entirely sure how this impacts our security interest or if it creates any complications with the filing process. Has anyone dealt with UCC 1-308 reservation of rights clauses in their secured transactions? Does the Secretary of State even accept filings with this type of language, or would it cause a rejection? Really need to understand if this creates any perfection issues or affects our lien priority. Any guidance would be appreciated since I've got three more deals this week where borrowers are asking about this.
37 comments
Join the conversation
Oliver Schulz
UCC 1-308 is basically someone trying to preserve their rights under the agreement while still signing. But here's the thing - it doesn't really change the legal obligations they're agreeing to. If they sign a promissory note and security agreement, they're still bound by those terms regardless of adding that language. I've seen this come up maybe a dozen times over the years.
0 coins
Amina Diallo
•That makes sense. So it's more of a symbolic thing than actually changing the legal framework? What about on the UCC-1 itself - have you seen SOS offices reject filings that include this language?
0 coins
Oliver Schulz
•Never seen it on a UCC-1 form directly, but if someone tried to add it in the additional provisions section, it probably wouldn't affect the filing's validity. The UCC-1 is just giving notice of the security interest - the actual rights and obligations are in the underlying security agreement.
0 coins
Natasha Kuznetsova
I work with a lot of small business loans and this UCC 1-308 thing pops up occasionally. Usually it's someone who's been reading too much stuff online about "sovereign citizen" type theories. The reality is that if they're entering into a commercial loan agreement and giving you a security interest in their equipment, that UCC 1-308 notation isn't going to magically make them not liable for the debt.
0 coins
AstroAdventurer
•Exactly this. I had a borrower try to use UCC 1-308 on a $75K equipment loan last year. He thought it would let him keep the equipment if he defaulted. Didn't work out that way when we had to repo the machinery.
0 coins
Amina Diallo
•So it sounds like it's mostly people misunderstanding what their rights actually are under the loan documents. Good to know it doesn't actually create any real complications for the lender side.
0 coins
Javier Mendoza
Had a similar situation recently where I needed to verify that our security agreement language was rock solid despite the borrower adding UCC 1-308 language. Ended up using Certana.ai's document verification tool to upload both the security agreement and UCC-1 filing to make sure everything was consistent and there weren't any gaps in our collateral description or debtor name matching. Really helpful for catching those kinds of details that could cause problems later.
0 coins
Amina Diallo
•How does that verification process work? Do you just upload the PDFs and it checks for inconsistencies?
0 coins
Javier Mendoza
•Yeah exactly - you upload the security agreement and UCC-1, and it cross-checks debtor names, collateral schedules, filing numbers, all that stuff. Catches things like name variations or missing collateral descriptions that could void your security interest. Super useful when you're dealing with borrowers who are trying to add their own language to documents.
0 coins
Emma Wilson
•That's actually really smart. I've had filings get rejected because of tiny name discrepancies between the loan docs and UCC-1. Would have saved me a lot of headache.
0 coins
Malik Davis
From a legal standpoint, UCC 1-308 is just preserving someone's right to challenge specific terms later, but it doesn't negate their agreement to the contract as a whole. Think of it like saying "I'm signing this but I reserve the right to dispute X, Y, Z." Problem is, in most commercial loan situations, if they're disputing the fundamental terms, they probably shouldn't be signing in the first place.
0 coins
Isabella Santos
•This is why I always recommend having borrowers initial every page of the security agreement. Makes it harder for them to claim later that they didn't understand or agree to specific provisions.
0 coins
Malik Davis
•Good practice. Also helps to have a conversation about what they're actually agreeing to before signing. Most of the UCC 1-308 stuff comes from people who feel like they're being forced into something they don't understand.
0 coins
Ravi Gupta
I'm confused about this whole thing. If someone adds UCC 1-308 to their loan documents, does that mean they can just decide not to pay later? Seems like it would make the whole agreement pointless if borrowers could just opt out whenever they want.
0 coins
Oliver Schulz
•No, that's not how it works. UCC 1-308 doesn't let someone opt out of their contractual obligations. If they signed a promissory note agreeing to pay $50K, they still owe $50K regardless of adding that language.
0 coins
Ravi Gupta
•OK that makes more sense. So it's basically meaningless in most loan situations?
0 coins
Malik Davis
•Pretty much. It might preserve their right to challenge specific procedures or terms, but it doesn't change the fundamental obligation to repay the loan or the lender's right to the collateral.
0 coins
GalacticGuru
honestly this sounds like another one of those internet legal theories that people think will get them out of their obligations. like when people think they can write "without prejudice" on their tax returns or something lol
0 coins
Freya Pedersen
•Yeah I've seen some wild stuff over the years. Had a guy try to pay his equipment loan with a "promissory note" he created himself. Some people will try anything to avoid their actual obligations.
0 coins
Natasha Kuznetsova
•The sovereign citizen playbook is full of this stuff. UCC 1-308, "traveling not driving," creating their own license plates. None of it actually works in the real world.
0 coins
Omar Fawaz
Just want to add that if you're concerned about borrowers trying to modify your loan documents, make sure your security agreement has clear language stating that any modifications must be in writing and signed by both parties. That way someone can't claim that adding UCC 1-308 language somehow changed the terms of the deal.
0 coins
Amina Diallo
•Good point. Our standard forms already have that language but worth double-checking. Do you think it's worth explicitly addressing UCC 1-308 in the loan documents?
0 coins
Omar Fawaz
•Probably not necessary to specifically mention it. Your standard "no modifications except in writing" clause should cover it. Adding specific language about UCC 1-308 might actually draw more attention to it.
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
I've had to deal with this UCC 1-308 thing a few times and usually just explain to the borrower that it doesn't actually protect them in the way they think it does. Most of the time once you walk them through what they're actually signing and what their obligations are, they realize the reservation of rights language isn't going to help them. Better to address their concerns directly than to just dismiss it.
0 coins
Diego Vargas
•That's a good approach. I think a lot of times people add this language because they're nervous about signing loan documents and don't fully understand what they're agreeing to.
0 coins
Chloe Anderson
•Exactly. Taking a few extra minutes to explain the terms usually resolves their concerns better than just telling them the UCC 1-308 language is meaningless.
0 coins
Anastasia Fedorov
Wait, so if UCC 1-308 doesn't actually do anything, why do people keep trying to use it? Where is this coming from?
0 coins
Natasha Kuznetsova
•Mostly from online forums and YouTube videos that promote "sovereign citizen" theories. People think they've found some secret legal loophole that lawyers don't want you to know about.
0 coins
Anastasia Fedorov
•Ah that explains it. I was wondering why this seemed to come up more in the last few years. Social media spreading bad legal advice.
0 coins
GalacticGuru
•same place people get the idea that they can discharge their debts by writing "ACCEPTED FOR VALUE" on bills. internet rabbit holes are dangerous lol
0 coins
StarStrider
For what it's worth, I ran into a similar situation where I needed to make absolutely sure our UCC-1 filing was bulletproof despite the borrower's attempts to modify the underlying agreement. Used Certana.ai to upload our security agreement and UCC-1 filing for verification - caught a small discrepancy in how we described the collateral that could have been problematic. Worth using when you want to be extra careful about document consistency.
0 coins
Amina Diallo
•That seems like a smart precaution, especially when dealing with borrowers who are already questioning the documentation. Better to catch any issues upfront.
0 coins
StarStrider
•Definitely. The last thing you want is to find out during a foreclosure that there's some mismatch between your security agreement and UCC filing that could affect your lien priority.
0 coins
Sean Doyle
Bottom line is that UCC 1-308 reservation of rights doesn't change the borrower's fundamental obligations under a loan agreement. They still owe the money, you still have your security interest, and they can't just decide to keep the collateral without paying. It's mostly just noise that makes people feel better about signing documents they're nervous about.
0 coins
Amina Diallo
•Thanks, that's really helpful. Sounds like I can proceed with these deals without worrying too much about the UCC 1-308 language as long as our underlying documentation is solid.
0 coins
Zara Rashid
•Just make sure you're still documenting everything properly and following standard UCC filing procedures. The UCC 1-308 stuff is a distraction but doesn't excuse sloppy paperwork.
0 coins
Logan Stewart
This is really helpful - I've been seeing more of these UCC 1-308 requests lately and wasn't sure how to handle them. From what everyone's saying, it sounds like the key is to focus on having solid underlying documentation rather than getting hung up on the reservation of rights language itself. I'm curious though - for those of you who've dealt with this multiple times, do you find it's worth having a standard explanation ready for borrowers who ask about it? Or do you just let them add the language and move on since it doesn't really affect anything?
0 coins