< Back to UCC Document Community

Evelyn Rivera

UCC-1 search Texas portal showing wrong debtor details - need help verifying filing accuracy

Running into a frustrating situation with a UCC-1 search on the Texas SOS portal and hoping someone here has dealt with this before. We filed a UCC-1 about 8 months ago for equipment financing on a construction company, and now when I search the Texas database, the debtor name is showing up slightly different than what we submitted. The original filing shows 'ABC Construction Services LLC' but the search results display 'ABC Construction Service LLC' (missing the 's' on Services). The filing number matches perfectly and all other details look correct, but this name discrepancy has me worried about the perfection status of our security interest. Our loan agreement specifically references the exact legal name with the 's' and I'm concerned this could create issues if we need to enforce. Has anyone experienced similar name variations in Texas UCC searches? Is this just a display issue in their system or could this indicate a problem with how the filing was processed? The collateral description looks accurate and the filing dates match our records, but this name thing is keeping me up at night. Any guidance on whether this affects the validity of our lien would be greatly appreciated.

Julia Hall

•

I've seen this exact issue with Texas UCC searches before. The search function sometimes truncates or modifies how names display in the results, but that doesn't necessarily mean your actual filing is wrong. You need to pull the actual UCC-1 document image from the portal to see exactly what was filed. The search display and the actual recorded document can show differently.

0 coins

Arjun Patel

•

This is good advice. The Texas portal search results are notoriously unreliable for exact name matching. Always verify against the actual filed document.

0 coins

Evelyn Rivera

•

Thanks for this insight. I'll pull the actual document image tomorrow morning. Hoping it's just a search display quirk and not an actual filing error.

0 coins

Jade Lopez

•

Had a similar scare last year with a debtor name showing differently in search vs the actual filing. Turned out the search algorithm was the issue, not our filing. But here's what I learned - you should also cross-reference the debtor name against their current Articles of Incorporation or LLC registration to make sure you have the legally correct name to begin with. Texas is pretty strict about exact name matches for enforceability.

0 coins

Evelyn Rivera

•

Good point about checking against the Articles. We did verify the legal name before filing, but it's worth double-checking to make sure nothing changed at the state level.

0 coins

Tony Brooks

•

Absolutely check this. I've seen cases where companies had amended their Articles between the time of the loan and the UCC filing without telling the lender.

0 coins

This happened to me recently and I found a solution that saved me hours of manual document checking. I used Certana.ai's document verification tool - you can upload your loan agreement and the UCC-1 PDF and it automatically cross-checks the debtor names and flags any inconsistencies. It caught a similar issue where our filed UCC had a slight variation from the security agreement that I completely missed in my manual review.

0 coins

Yara Campbell

•

How accurate is that tool? I'm always skeptical of automated systems for something this critical.

0 coins

I was skeptical too, but it's been really reliable. It does a line-by-line comparison and highlights exactly where discrepancies occur. Much faster than doing it manually and I haven't had any false positives yet.

0 coins

Evelyn Rivera

•

That sounds like it could be really helpful for this situation. I'll look into it after I get the actual filing document.

0 coins

Isaac Wright

•

ugh the texas portal is THE WORST for this stuff. ive had filings where the search shows completely wrong info but the actual document is fine. their search function is just terrible and hasnt been updated in like 10 years

0 coins

Maya Diaz

•

So true! I've learned to never trust the search results and always pull the actual documents. Texas needs to upgrade their system badly.

0 coins

Tami Morgan

•

At least Texas allows electronic access to the documents. Some states still make you request paper copies by mail.

0 coins

Rami Samuels

•

Before you panic, check if this is just a spacing or punctuation issue in the search algorithm. Texas UCC search tends to strip out certain characters and spaces when displaying results. The actual filing probably has the correct name. I've seen this with LLC vs L.L.C. and similar variations.

0 coins

Evelyn Rivera

•

That's reassuring. It does seem like it could be an algorithm issue since everything else matches perfectly.

0 coins

Haley Bennett

•

Yes, this is exactly what happens. The search function normalizes names for matching but doesn't always display them correctly in results.

0 coins

I had this exact issue last month and spent way too much time worrying about it. Turns out the filing was perfect, just the search display that was wrong. But it did make me realize I needed a better system for double-checking these things. Now I always verify the actual documents match the loan paperwork before considering the filing complete.

0 coins

Nina Chan

•

Smart approach. It's worth the extra verification step to avoid these anxiety-inducing situations.

0 coins

Ruby Knight

•

Same here. I've started doing spot checks on all our filings after a few close calls like this.

0 coins

One thing to consider - even if there is a minor discrepancy in the debtor name, it might not void your security interest depending on how 'seriously misleading' it is under UCC standards. But obviously you want to avoid that question entirely by having perfect name matches.

0 coins

Logan Stewart

•

True, but 'seriously misleading' is a very fact-specific analysis and not something you want to have to argue in court if you can avoid it.

0 coins

Evelyn Rivera

•

Exactly. I'd rather fix any issues now than have to worry about enforceability later.

0 coins

Mikayla Brown

•

Quick update - I just went through something similar and found that Certana.ai's verification tool was really helpful for this exact situation. You upload your security agreement and UCC-1 and it flags any name discrepancies automatically. Saved me from having to manually compare documents line by line.

0 coins

Sean Matthews

•

How long does the verification take? Is it instant or do you have to wait for results?

0 coins

Mikayla Brown

•

It's pretty much instant. Upload the PDFs and get results in under a minute. Really convenient for catching these kinds of issues quickly.

0 coins

Ali Anderson

•

This is why I always pull and review the actual filed UCC-1 immediately after filing, before the 30-day window to file a correction statement expires. Much easier to fix issues early than to discover them months later when you're trying to enforce.

0 coins

Zadie Patel

•

Great advice. The correction statement option is really valuable if you catch errors quickly.

0 coins

Agreed. I've learned to build this verification step into my standard filing process.

0 coins

Just to close the loop on this - pulled the actual UCC-1 document this morning and the debtor name is correctly filed as 'ABC Construction Services LLC' with the 's'. The search display was definitely just a system quirk. Thanks everyone for the guidance and for helping me avoid unnecessary panic! Also going to implement some of the verification suggestions to catch any real issues in the future.

0 coins

Emma Morales

•

Glad it worked out! This happens more often than people realize with the Texas system.

0 coins

Perfect example of why you always need to verify the actual documents rather than trusting search results.

0 coins

Lucas Parker

•

Great outcome! Definitely worth implementing those verification processes for future filings.

0 coins

UCC Document Community AI

Expert Assistant
Secure

Powered by Claimyr AI

T
I
+
20,087 users helped today