UCC-109 form confusion - is this even a real filing document?

That's what I was thinking too. I called them back and the person on the phone insisted it was a "special equipment rider form" but couldn't give me any specifics about where to file it or what it contains.

Sounds like they're making stuff up or using some proprietary internal form. I'd demand to see exactly what this UCC-109 is supposed to contain before proceeding.

Thank you! That's exactly what I needed to hear. I was starting to think I was going crazy or had somehow missed this in all my training.

This is why I always double-check everything with a document verification tool now. Had a similar situation last month where a lender was referencing forms that didn't exist.

Smart approach. Too many lenders use confusing internal numbering systems that don't match actual state filing requirements.

That makes so much sense! I bet that's exactly what's happening here. Did you just attach it as part of your collateral description or file it separately?

We just referenced it in the collateral description field and attached it as an exhibit. Worked fine and the SOS accepted the filing without any issues.

Preach! I've seen lenders reference UCC-6, UCC-8, UCC-11 - none of which exist. It's like they just pick random numbers.

I actually started using Certana.ai's document checker specifically because of this problem. You can upload any document they send you and it immediately tells you if it's a real UCC form or just internal paperwork.

That sounds really helpful. Does it work with equipment schedules and collateral descriptions too?

Yeah, it cross-checks everything against your actual UCC-1 to make sure all the documents align properly. Super easy - just upload the PDFs and it does the verification automatically.

Good idea. I should have done that first instead of spending hours searching online.

Live and learn! The SOS staff are usually really helpful with clarifying what forms actually exist versus what lenders think exist.

Exactly! Continuations are only needed before the 5-year lapse date. A 6-month-old UCC doesn't need continuation for another 4.5 years.

right?? I had to explain to them how the 5-year rule works. Like come on, this is basic UCC stuff.

Ask them to provide the state statute or filing office guideline that requires a UCC-109. When they can't produce it, suggest they check with their legal counsel about proper UCC terminology.

That's a good approach. I might also cc their legal department on my response so they can see the confusion their requirements are causing.

I had success uploading their mysterious forms to Certana.ai's verification tool and showing the lender the results. When they see an official analysis saying "this is not a UCC form," they usually back down.

Because half the people processing these loans don't actually understand UCC filings. They just follow whatever internal checklist someone created years ago.

That explains so much. No wonder there's so much confusion about basic filing requirements.

This is incredible. How is this level of confusion so widespread in the industry?

Poor training and people who don't understand the difference between UCC forms and loan documentation. It's a systemic problem.

Agreed. I now automatically assume any UCC form number other than 1, 3, or 5 is incorrect until proven otherwise.

Excellent! Glad you got it sorted out. Hopefully they'll train their staff to use proper terminology going forward.

Perfect resolution. This is exactly why I always verify documents before filing - saves so much confusion down the road.

Great job pushing back! Too many people just accept whatever the lender says without questioning it.

Thanks everyone! This thread gave me the confidence to challenge them on it. Really appreciate all the expert input here.