UCC-11 lien search showing confusing results - need help interpreting

UCC-11 searches can definitely be tricky to interpret, especially when you're dealing with multiple filings over time. The continuation issue you mentioned is actually pretty common - if there was a continuation filed in 2019, the original 2014 filing would still be effective. Continuations extend the effectiveness for another 5 years from the original lapse date, not from when the continuation was filed. As for the debtor name variations with and without the comma, that's unfortunately a common problem that can cause real headaches.

You're definitely right to be concerned about the partial release that references collateral not in the original filing. That could indicate either an error in the release or that there were amendments to the original UCC-1 that expanded the collateral description. Have you checked for any UCC-3 amendments between the original filing and the partial release? Sometimes lenders will file amendments to add equipment or change collateral descriptions, then later file partial releases for specific items.

The debtor name discrepancy is a red flag that needs immediate attention. Even small differences like the comma can technically create separate legal entities in some jurisdictions. I've seen deals fall through because lenders didn't catch these name mismatches early enough. You should definitely get clarification from the borrower about which exact legal name they're operating under and make sure all your documentation matches exactly.

For what it's worth, I ran into a similar mess with UCC-11 search results last year and ended up having to pay for a more comprehensive search through a different service provider. Some of the budget search companies don't always catch all the variations and related filings. The extra cost was worth it for the peace of mind, especially on a larger deal.

Just want to echo what others have said about the continuation timing. If the original UCC-1 was filed in 2014, it would have been set to lapse in 2019 (5 years later). A continuation filed in 2019 would extend it to 2024. But here's the tricky part - the continuation has to be filed within 6 months before the lapse date to be effective. So if it was filed too early or too late, it might not be valid.

Have you considered that some of these filings might be from different lenders entirely? I've seen situations where a company has multiple financing arrangements and each lender files their own UCC-1. The partial release might be from a completely different transaction than the one you're concerned about. Cross-referencing the secured party names should help clarify this.

I've been dealing with UCC searches for over 10 years and your situation sounds fairly typical for a company that's been operating for a while. The key is methodically going through each filing chronologically and mapping out the relationships. Start with the earliest UCC-1, then track any amendments, continuations, assignments, and releases in order. This will help you build a complete picture of the lien history.

One more thing to consider - some states have quirks in how they handle UCC-11 searches that can cause confusing results. For example, some states include terminated filings in search results for a certain period after termination, while others purge them immediately. The search parameters and date ranges can also affect what shows up. Make sure you understand how your specific state handles these searches.

Bottom line, don't panic but definitely take this seriously. UCC search discrepancies can kill deals if not properly resolved. I'd recommend getting copies of all the actual filings (not just the search results) and reviewing them carefully. If you're still confused after that, consider bringing in outside counsel who specializes in secured transactions. The cost of expert help is usually worth it compared to the risk of missing something important.

Update us on what you find out! These kinds of situations are great learning experiences for everyone. I'm curious whether the partial release issue turns out to be an amendment you missed or something else entirely.