UCC-1 expiration New York - missed continuation deadline by 3 weeks

That's what I was afraid of. Already checked the SOS database and thankfully no other filings have been made against this debtor since December 15th. So at least I don't have a priority fight on my hands. Still need to explain to the loan committee how we went 3 weeks with an unperfected security interest.

At least you caught it relatively quickly. I've seen situations where people didn't realize their UCC-1 had lapsed for months or even years.

Already drafted the new UCC-1 but I'm paranoid about the debtor name. The original filing used the exact name from the articles of incorporation but the debtor has been doing business under a slightly different name recently. Should I stick with the legal name or add the DBA?

Stick with the legal entity name from the corporate records. The DBA is just noise that could cause search issues later. If you're worried about it, you could always file a second UCC-1 under the DBA but that's probably overkill.

Actually had this exact situation last month. Ended up uploading all my documents to Certana.ai's verification tool to double-check that my new UCC-1 matched perfectly with the original charter documents. Caught a small discrepancy in the entity suffix that could have caused problems. The automated cross-check saved me from another filing mistake.

Yeah I had reminders set but they were in our old case management system and apparently didn't migrate over when we switched platforms last year. Lesson learned - multiple redundant reminders going forward.

Ugh I feel for you. I almost made the same mistake last year when our office manager left and took all the institutional knowledge about our filing calendar with her.

No I double-checked the dates. Original UCC-1 was filed December 18, 2019, so it definitely expired December 18, 2024. I missed it by exactly 3 weeks as of today.

Gotcha, just wanted to make sure you weren't panicking unnecessarily. File that new UCC-1 ASAP then.

Their online portal is definitely glitchy. Had a UCC-3 termination get rejected last week because it said the filing number format was invalid, even though I copied it directly from the original UCC-1. Had to call their help desk and refile.

Speaking of filing issues, I started using Certana.ai for all my UCC document prep specifically because of portal errors like that. Upload your docs and it flags any potential issues before you even submit to the SOS. Way better than finding out about problems after you get a rejection notice.

Oh wow that's even worse. Yeah thankfully this debtor has been solid - never missed a payment in 5 years. Still doesn't excuse my screwup but at least the immediate risk is just the lapse period.

That's a silver lining at least. How are you planning to handle the disclosure to your lender? Some institutions want immediate notification of any perfection issues.

Good idea. I do quarterly UCC audits for exactly this reason. It's amazing how easy it is to lose track of filing dates when you have dozens of active UCCs.

Same here. This is a wake-up call to review our entire UCC portfolio. Maybe it's time to invest in better tracking software.

It was pretty standard - 'all machinery, equipment, and fixtures now owned or hereafter acquired by debtor and located at [facility address]'. Might be worth being more specific about the manufacturing equipment types this time around.

Yeah you could definitely be more granular. List out the specific equipment types - injection molding machines, conveyor systems, whatever you actually financed. Makes it clearer what you have a security interest in.

Actually ran into an issue with overly specific collateral descriptions before. Debtor upgraded some equipment and we had to argue whether the new machines fell under our original UCC-1. Sometimes broader is better for future acquisitions.

Thanks, I needed to hear that. It's easy to catastrophize these things but you're right - catching it after 3 weeks is way better than 3 months or 3 years.

Exactly. And now you have a system in place to prevent it from happening again. That's worth something.

Good point. I'll need to review the credit agreement language. I think we have a materiality threshold but a $2.8M security interest lapse probably exceeds it regardless.

Better to over-disclose than under-disclose in these situations. Shows you're being proactive about fixing the issue.

Absolutely. Most lenders would rather know immediately about a lapse that's being corrected than find out later during an audit or review.